GURJINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners were granted bail by the trial Court on 18th June 1995 when the case was registered under Sections 323/324/341/148/149/506 of the Indian Penal Code. He has drawn my attention to the order dated 18th June 1995 passed by the learned trial Court and it is mentioned in this order that Section 506 of the Code is non-bailable. The learned counsel has also relied on a judgment of Rajasthan High Court in case Sukhpal Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 1988(1) All India Criminal Law Reporter 1109. From the facts I find that Section 307 IPC was added at later stage when injury No. 1 of injured Surinder Singh which was kept under observations, was declared dangerous to life by the Medical Officer after receipt of X-ray report. The FIR, however, shows that Surinder Singh was given blows by Gurmit Singh and Sukhwinder Singh with knife and stick. Gurmit Singh is not petitioner in this petition. Sukhwinder Singh is, however, petitioner No. 4 in this case. Without expressing my opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view, that petitioners No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 are entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I direct that in case of arrest under Section 307 of the Code, the petitioners No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 shall be admitted to bail on each one of them furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with the surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

(3.) I may also add this order will not have any bearing on any application which petitioner No. 4 will file for grant of regular bail. Application in respect of petitioner No. 4 is dismissed. Petition dismissed.