ARMINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No. 49, dtd. 8/5/2020, Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala, under Ss. 302, 307, 34 IPC and Ss. 25, 27 of Arms Act.

(2.) The FIR was lodged at the instance of Pardeep Singh wherein it is alleged that on 7/5/2020 at about 9.30 pm. he along with his friends i.e. fellow Kabaddi players namely Arwinderjit Singh, Balraj Singh, Gurjit Singh and Mangal Singh, were going in an Endeavor vehicle driven by Maninder Singh. It is alleged that when they were near main bus stand Lakhan Ke Padde, then they noticed a grey coloured vehicle parked by the side of the road in which curtains were affixed on the rear windshield. Getting suspicious, they took their vehicle near the said parked car and which sped away towards the village. The complainant and others chased the said vehicle and were able to intercept the same on the boundary of the village. When the complainant and his friend Arvinderjit Singh alighted from the vehicle, they saw that Paramjit Singh who is a police official was there carrying a revolver and who started firing at the complainant and at Arvinderjit Singh. The bullets hit on the chest of Arvinderjit Singh and also the complainant on his shoulder and waist. The complainant and others in order to save themselves took shelter behind the vehicle. It is further alleged that in the meantime Mangu (petitioner) who belongs to their village got out of the car and challenged them by raising a 'lalkara'. It is alleged that the complainant and others in order to save their lives went towards SGL Hospital, Mustafabad. It is further the case of prosecution that on account of the injuries sustained by Arvinderjit Singh, he ultimately succumbed to his injuries.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the instant case and that even if the allegations as levelled in the FIR are taken to be correct, still it is evident that neither the petitioner was armed with any weapon nor is attributed any injury and in fact he had alighted from the car after the incident of firing had already taken place and is attributed a 'lalkara' after the incident of firing.