RAJA RAM Vs. SURINDER SINGH ALIAS BONA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIR No. 93 under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act was recorded in Police Station Guhla on March 13, 1992 against the accused, namely, Surinder Singh respondent No. 1, herein and Jai Pal. Jai Pal filed an application for bail before Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal who vide his order dated 2.4.1992 dismissed the same. Jai Pal filed an application for bail in this Court which was allowed. The other accused Surinder Singh then filed bail application before the Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal who vide his order dated 6.6.1992 allowed the same. The complainant who is the brother of deceased, Thath Singh has moved this petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Additional Sessions Judge has exercised its jurisdiction while granting bail arbitrarily inasmuch as he has not considered the nature of offence and the part taken by the accused Surinder Singh in the commission of the crime. He has placed reliance on Major Singh v. Gurdev Singh and others, 1991(3) RCR 73.

(2.) ON the other hand Shri Thapar, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has argued supporting the impugned order.

(3.) BEFORE proceeding further, it is expedient to examine the FIR which has been reproduced in para 1 of the petition. According to the said F.I.R. Surinder Singh, respondent had fired from his D.B.B.L. Gun on Thath Singh and it had hit him below amblicus as a result whereof he fell down. Then Surinder Singh turned back in the street and by coming forward fired one more shot on lying Thath Singh. It had hit him on his left buttock. Thereafter the respondent had run away alongwith his gun. The part attributed to Jai Pal is that he had called the deceased. Thath Singh from the place where he was playing cards. Raja Ram, an eye-witness, had lodged the said FIR. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has taken into consideration all the relevant circumstances attending the occurrence. He has rightly exercised his jurisdiction while granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. He has considered the nature and gravity of the offence as also the part attributed to the accused in commission of the crime.