Jatinder Singh Alias Zimmy v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 37 07.03.2023 Sri Anandpur Sahib, 302, 34 IPC (Sec!on 323 IPC District Roopnagar added later on)

¶1The pe!!oner incarcerated in the FIR cap!oned above had come up before this Court under Sec!on 483 of Bhara!ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.

¶2In paragraph 18 of the bail pe!!on, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶3The facts and allega!ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: "2. That in compliance thereto, it is respec>ully submi:ed that the factual matrix pertaining to present case is that, on 06.03.2023, the inves!ga!ng officer-SHO Police Sta!on Sri Anandpur Sahib, along with the police party was on patrolling duty in connec!on with Holla Mohalla fes!val at Sri Anandpur Sahib, in a government vehicle bearing No.PB-12-M-6620, and at about 10:30 PM, he received informa!on that an alterca!on had taken place near the recep!on gate in the area of village Badhal and one person had received an injury. It is further submi:ed that on receipt of the aforemen!oned informa!on, inves!ga!ng officer-SHO Police Sta!on Sri Anandpur Sahib, reached the spot, where a large number of devotees order/judgment. 1 were present and a person in the robe of a Nihang, was lying injured on the road. It is further submi:ed that Gurdarshan Singh son of Balbir Singh, resident of village Soita, District SBS Nagar, and Ranjit Singh son of Manga Singh resident of Bhagat Singh Nagar, Khanna, who were found at the spot, were known to the injured and they disclosed the iden!ty of the injured person lying on the road, as Pardeep Singh @ Prince. It is further submi:ed that injured Pardeep Singh @ Prince was rushed to Civil Hospital Sri Anandpur Sahib, where he was declared dead, and therea8er the dead body was shi8ed to the mortuary of Civil Hospital, Rupnagar.

¶4That it is further submi:ed that a8er the postmortem, the viscera of the deceased-Pardeep Singh@ Prince, was sent to the Chemical Examiner, Punjab. However, on receipt of the report of Chemical Examiner, no poison was detected in any limb of the deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince. It is further submi:ed that the board of doctors declared cause of death in this case as injury to vital organ-right lung, leading to hemorrhagic shock, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable !me between injury and death was declared within few minutes and all the injuries were declared to be antemortem in nature."

¶4The pe!!oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi!ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera!on would cause an irreversible injus!ce to the pe!!oner and his family.

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶6It would be appropriate to refer to the following por!ons of the status report, which read as follows: "8. That it is further submi:ed that Satbir Singh @ Ladi, was arrested and the Swraj-744 tractor bearing No.PB-12-Y-3329 which was fi:ed with big woofers and a music system and had one damaged woofer with a hole of sword size was taken into police possession. It is further submi:ed that two bent swords used by accused Satbir Singh @ Ladi and deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince during figh!ng with each other at the !me of occurrence and a small sword stabbed by accused-Satbir Singh @Ladi to deceased Pardeep Singh @ Prince were also recovered and taken into order/judgment. 2 A. ROLE OF THE PETITIONER: It is respec>ully submi:ed that from the four videos which were taken on record during inves!ga!on, the Pe!!oner-Ja!nder Singh @ Zimmy and his co-accused Narinderpal Singh @ Nindu have been seen jostling with the deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince during the occurrence. It is further submi:ed that from the postmortem report of the deceased-Pardeep Singh @Prince, it has been established that there is one stab wound (injury no.1 as men!oned in para no.3 of instant Status Report) on the body of the deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince and the same is a:ributed to accused-Satbir Singh @ Ladi, whereas, the remaining injuries are abrasions and bruise which are blunt and simple injuries. It is further submi:ed that since the Pe!!oner-Ja!nder Singh @ Zimmy and Narender Pal Singh @ Nindu were jostling and scuffling with the deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince without any inten!on to kill him, therefore, during the inves!ga!on, their role has been established to cause simple blunt injuries to the deceased-Pardeep Singh @ Prince. B. THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER It is respec>ully submi:ed that there are three eye-witnesses in the present case namely Gurdarshan Singh, Ranjit Singh and Lovepreet Singh and out of them one prosecu!on witness namely Lovepreet Singh has already been examined before the Ld. Trial Court as PW-2. Apart from this, there are several videos of the incident filmed by the general public present at the spot and which are made part of the case record, as evidence."

¶7It has come in evidence that the accident had happened in spur of the moment and the scuffle ensued. In between, Satbir Singh took small sword from the deceased Pardeep Singh and stabbed him with it on the right side of his chest which turned fatal. Thus, there was one fatal blow which was caused by Satbir Singh and there is no evidence of media!on or delibera!ons between Satbir Singh and pe!!oner so as to prima facie aBribute the said blow upon the pe!!oner.

¶8There is sufficient primafacie evidence connec!ng the pe!!oner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarcera!on should not be a replica of post-convic!on sentencing.

¶9This court granted bail to a similarly placed co-accused in CRM-M-10181-2024 Narender Pal Singh v. State of Punjab, decided on 30 August 2024. order/judgment. 3

¶10As per paragraph 14 of the bail pe!!on, the pe!!oner has been in custody since

13.05.2023. As per the custody cer!ficate dated 04.11.2024, the pe!!oner's total custody in this FIR is around one year and six months. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega!ons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus!fiability of further pre-trial incarcera!on at this stage.

¶11The inves!ga!on indicates that the pe!!oner is not the main accused, so the pe!!oner's bail shall not be treated as a precedent for gran!ng bail to the other co-accused with a higher role.

¶12Without commen!ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men!oned above, the pe!!oner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the !me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶13Given above, provided the pe!!oner is not required in any other case, the pe!!oner shall be released on bail in the FIR cap!oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa!sfac!on of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep!ng the surety, the concerned Court must be sa!sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶14While furnishing a personal bond, the pe!!oner shall men!on the following personal iden!fica!on details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the aBes!ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶15This order is subject to the pe!!oner's complying with the following terms.

¶16The pe!!oner shall abide by all statutory bond condi!ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe!!oner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

¶17Given the nature of the allega!ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this order/judgment. 4 case, the pe!!oner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the vic!m un!l the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condi!on to rule out any aBempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the vic!m. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Inves!ga!on, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna BhaB v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

¶18Given the background of allega!ons against the pe!!oner, it becomes paramount to protect the vic!m's family, and incapacita!ng the accused would be one of the primary op!ons un!l the final conclusion of case. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restric!on is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanc!on]. Given the nature of the allega!ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pe!!oner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuni!on, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiOeen days from release from prison and inform the Inves!gator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pe!!oner shall be en!tled to renew and take it back in case of acquiBal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restric!ng firearms would ins!ll confidence in the vic!m(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repea!ng the offense.

¶19The condi!ons men!oned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Pe!!on (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that "The bail condi!ons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be propor!onal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail condi!ons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condi!ons that would result in the depriva!on of rights and liber!es must be eschewed."

¶20Any observa!on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶21A cer!fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe!!oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aBest it to be a true copy. If the aBes!ng officer order/judgment. 5 wants to verify its authen!city, such an officer can also verify its authen!city and may download and use the downloaded copy for aBes!ng bonds.

¶22Petition allowed in terms men!oned above. All pending applica!ons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

18.11.2024 Jyoti-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 06.11.2024 Pronounced on: 18.11.2024 Ja!nder Singh @ Zimmy ...Pe!!oner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the pe!!oner. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab. ****