DHARMINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC') for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.46 dtd. 31/5/2018 under Ss. 307, 438, 427, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'); Ss. 121, 121-A, 122, 124-A, 115 and 120-B of the IPC, 1860; Ss. 11, 12, 13, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'UAPA Act'); Ss. 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sec. 66-F of the Information and Technology Act, 2000 added later on, registered at Police Station Rangar Nangal, District Batala.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has contented that as per the case of the prosecution, the FIR in question was initially registered on the statement of one Sartaj son of Kunj Lal, who was working as salesman in the liquor store of Balraj Singh. It is claimed that when he was sleeping in the liquor shop at Dhariawal (Adda Pandoi) on 30/5/2018 at about 3:30 a.m., some persons set the room of the liquor shop on fire by sprinkling petrol. He came out of the room and saved his life. The unidentified assailants ran away from the spot and an attempt had been made by the said assailants to kill the complainant after setting the room of the liquor shop on fire. Learned counsel contends that the petitioners have been roped in the present case on the basis of an alleged secret information that the petitioners have some link with an illegal organization and the said organization is aiding them financially in executing various illegal and unlawful activities. The petitioners were thereafter arrested on 1/6/2018 on the strength of the said secret information. He contends that the investigation in the case was completed on 16/11/2018 and a final report under Sec. 173 CrPC was filed, whereafter, the trial Court proceeded to frame charges punishable under the Ss. as afore- stated, including Sec. 124-A IPC.

(3.) Learned counsel argues that as per the allegations and the evidence collected by the prosecution during investigation of the case, the petitioners are alleged to be members of various WhatsApp groups and that upon arrest of the petitioners recovery of.32 bore revolver along with three live cartridges, two live cartridges of.315 bore, Rs.40,000.00 currency notes, 110 posters of Sikhs for Justice, three forms of Khalistan Zindabad, 01 board containing Punjab Referendum 2020, fiber-sheet, 5 spray, two mobile phones and one box with brush etc., was effected from petitioner No.1, while.22 bore pistol along with 03 cartridges was recovered from petitioner No.2. It is contended that upon consideration of the material recovered, the offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, would not be made out and at best, it would a case under the Arms Act, 1959. He further contends that despite conclusion of investigation, there is no material available with the investigating agency as would establish any link of the petitioners to any unlawful activities or unlawful association formed by the petitioners.