HARJIT SINGH Vs. JASBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Harjit Singh has filed this petition under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in connection with FIR No. 105 of 1996 dated 18.8.1996 lodged at P.S. Sarhali, District Amritsar under Sections 307/452/506/148/149 IPC read with Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act. Petitioner has averred that on 18.8.1996 sons of petitioner Harpreet Singh and Harminder Singh had a scuffle with respondent No. 1 Jasbir Singh while they were having drinks in the house of one Avtar Singh. When they came back home and were having meals, respondents alongwith 5/6 other persons came to the residence of the petitioner armed with fire arms and started hurling abuses loudly and called the sons of the petitioner out of the house. When the petitioner alongwith his sons came out of his house, respondent No. 1 Jasbir Singh who was armed with a double barrel gun fired upon the petitioner and his sons with the intention to kill them but they escaped by hiding themselves between the walls. The petitioner then lodged the aforesaid F.I.R.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 who is posted at CIA staff Tarn Taran on getting information of the registration of the said case against him and respondent No. 2 manipulated registration of false case against the sons of the petitioner from one Charanjit Kaur. Thus on the basis of the report lodged by Charanjit Kaur F.I.R. No. 140/96 dated 18.8.1996 under sections 294, 354, 34 IPC was registered at P.S. City Tarn Taran. During investigation, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tarn Taran found F.I.R. 140/96 (supra) absolutely false and frivolous and he not only cancelled the F.I.R. but also ordered proceeding under Section 182 Cr.P.C. against the complainant Charanjit Kaur.

(3.) RESPONDENT Nos. 1 and 2 filed their reply and raised preliminary objection that the petitioner has no locus standi to file this petition. It is also contended that as per the law laid down by the High Court as well as by the Apex Court, it is only the State which has the right to file such a petition for cancellation of bail. It is denied that respondents have misrepresented the facts before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereupon anticipatory bail order was passed in their favour. Petitioner's sons were involved in a case under sections 294/354/34 IPC. It is also alleged that the story as put up in FIR No. 105 of 18.8.1996 is an after-thought in order to cover up the case registered against the sons of the petitioner under Sections 294/354/34 IPC. It is also averred that petitioner is an influential person and is having political links. Therefore, he got F.I.R. 105/1996 cancelled but complainant Charanjit Kaur had filed a complaint in the Court of Shri Gurjant Singh, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Tarn Taran. Petitioner's both the sons have been summoned by the Court vide order dated 5.10.1996. They also pleaded that ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar has granted anticipatory bail after perusing the record. Case against these respondents has been registered at the behest of the petitioner only to harass these respondents and to pressurise them as respondent Jaswant Singh is a witness in the complaint lodged by Charanjit Kaur.