IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-________ OF 2021

Gurpreet @ Guru

(Now confined in Central Jail, Kapurthala)

……………Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

……………Respondent

INDEX
Sr. Particulars Date Page Court
No. Fee
A. Urgent Form 01.02.2021 A
1. Petition u/s 439 Cr.P.C 01.02.2021 1-7
2. Annexure P-1 (FIR) 19.04.2020 8-10
3. Annexure P-3 (Order 04.11.2020 11-15
passed by Ld. ASJ,
Jalandhar)
4. Power of Attorney 13.11.2020 16
Vernaculars
5. Annexure P-1 (FIR) 19.04.2020 17-22

Note: 1. Any other case: Nil

2. Copy Supplied to AG, Punjab.

PLACE: CHANDIGARH (NARINDER S. LUCKY)

DATED: 01.02.2021 Advocate (P-1317/2003)
Counsel for the Petitioner
 1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB

AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M _________ of 2021

MEMO OF PARTIES

Gurpreet @ Guru, aged about 45 years, son of Gurnam Lal,

resident of 626, Balmik Mohalla, Chaugitti, Jalandhar.

(Now confined in Central Jail, Kapurthala)

……………Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

……………Respondent

PLACE: CHANDIGARH (NARINDER S. LUCKY)

DATED: 01.02.2021 ADVOCATE
Counsel for the Petitioner
 2

First Petition under Section 439

Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to

the petitioner in case FIR No. 61

dated 19.04.2020, under Section

304, 120-B IPC, registered at

Police Station Navi Baradari,

Police Commissionerate

Jalandhar, in the interest of

justice.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the petitioner is resident of above mentioned

address and is law abiding citizen of India and the above

noted false case has been lodged in State of Punjab,

therefore he is competent to file present petition u/s 438

Cr.P.C. before this Hon’ble Court.

2. That the petitioner has been falsely implicated in

the above noted case by the complainant whereas the

petitioner has not committed any offence. The copy of FIR

dated 19.04.2020 is annexed here with as Annexure P-1.

3. That there is no evidence linking the petitioner in

any way with the death of the accused. There is no evidence

to show either the presence at or any other association of

the petition with the scene of Crime. No recovery has been

made from the accused.

 3

4. That allegations leveled against the petitioner are

totally false and baseless. The allegations are totally without

any basis and the complainant has concealed the material

facts and with ulterior motives has lodged the above noted

FIR against the petitioner and other co-accused.

5. That there is no evidence against the accused.

The bare perusal of the FIR or the Police Records clearly

shows that it is a case of voluntary drug overdose and there

is no evidence to show that drug has been forcefully

administered to the deceased.

6. That it is worth to mention here that the

deceased was already a drug addict, and had a criminal

record. That one day before the fateful night, he was

released on bail after spending 3 months at prison. This fact

is mentioned in the FIR itself.

7. That it is a clear cut case of voluntary drug

overdose. As the deceased had just returned from the prison

a day before, he was having strong urges to consume drugs,

that is why on the pretext of buying Kurkure, he seems to

have gone out of house to consume drugs. Even as per the

story of the prosecution he had sold his mobile phone to

buy drugs from somewhere.

8. That the fact that he told her mother few hours

after going out of house that he will return in half an hour

 4

shows that he was out of the house on his own free sweet

will and there are no signs of any force or coercion.

9. That even if it is presumed for a moment that the

petitioner may have been involved in providing drugs to the

deceased, still the charge under 304 of Culpable Homicide

not amounting to murder and under 120B of Criminal

Conspiracy are not maintainable as there is no evidence of

Intention or Knowledge of likelihood of death the deceased.

10. That even if the story of prosecution is taken to

be gospel of true, then there are no evidences to establish

the requisite elements of conspiracy or of culpable

homicide. As per the story of the prosecution the deceased

had himself approached the petitioner and other co-

accused, then how could there be a hatching of a

conspiracy by the all the accused.

11. That the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge has

wrongly declined the bail application of the petitioner

without going into the legal aspect of the case and record

available on the file. The order of the Ld. Additional

Sessions Judge is attached here as Annexure P-2.

12. That the bail application of the petitioner has

been wrongly declined by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge,

Hoshiarpur without appreciating the arguments advanced

 5

by the petitioner and without considering the facts of the

case.

13. That the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge has

wrongly observed that there are chances of tempering with

the prosecution witnesses. That the Ld. Judge has failed to

appreciate the fact that, the only evidence against the

accused is the disclosure statement of the co-accused

Sandeep Singh made to police, hence in such a situation

how could it be said that there are chances of tempering.

14. That the investigation in the above case has been

completed and challan has been presented in the Court and

now nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. The

conclusion of trial will take a long time and petitioner

cannot be kept behind bars for indefinite period. Moreover,

due to spread of pandemic of COVID-19, the trial is not

likely to resume in near future.

15. That the petitioner is totally innocent and he has

not committed any offence and nothing was recovered from

him. He is a young man and has been falsely implicated by

the police only to save their skin because they unable to

trace the real culprits.

16. That moreover nothing is to be recovered from

the petitioner and his custodial interrogation is not

required. The petitioner undertakes to join the investigation

 6

and will co-operate with the investigating agency and will

not temper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

17. That the petitioner was arrested in this case on

06.08.2020 by the police, when he was in custody in some

other case and since then he is behind bars. The

investigation has been completed and trial is at the stage of

evidence and now due to spread of COVID-19, trial is not

progressing and in that eventuality, the petitioner cannot be

kept behind bars for indefinite period.

18. That the petitioner will abide by the terms and

conditions as laid down U/s 439 Cr.P.C. and will not

temper with prosecution evidence in any manner.

19. That the petitioner undertakes to furnish heavy

surety to the satisfaction of Hon'ble Court.

20. That as per the instructions, the petitioner is not

involved in any criminal case and he has not been declared

proclaimed offender by any court.

21. That no such or similar petition has earlier been

filed by the petitioner either in this Hon’ble Court or Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India, nor any such similar application is

pending before Trial Court, Jalandhar at the time of filing

the present petition.

 7

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that present

petition may kindly be allowed and petitioner may kindly be

granted regular bail in case FIR No. 61 dated 19.04.2020,

under Section 304, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station

Navi Baradari, Police Commissionerate Jalandhar.

It is further prayed that the filing of certified

copies of Annexures may kindly be exempted, in the interest

of justice.

Note: Affidavit is not required because petitioner is in jail.

PLACE: CHANDIGARH (NARINDER S. LUCKY)

DATED: 01.02.2021 ADVOCATE
Counsel for the Petitioner
 8

ANNEXURE P-1

FIRST INFORMATION REPORT

(Under Section 154 Cr.P.C.)

1. District: POLICE COMMISSIONERATE JALANDHAR

P.S: NAVI BARADARI

FIR No. 0061 Date: 19.04.2020

2. Act(s)

Sr. No. Acts Sections

1. IPC 1860 304, 120-B

First Information Contents:

Statement of Rupa Chauhan W/o Sandeep Chauhan,

resident of House no 18/2 Kamal Vihar, Police Station

Rama Mandi, Jalandhar, aged about 42 years Mobile No

97805-54297. It is stated that I am the resident of the

above mentioned address and I run a Beauty Parlor, My

husband is of a poor health and stays at home and I have

two male children, Elder one is Gagandeep Singh and

younger one is Amandeep Singh @ Kali, who was in

Kapurthala Jail for around 3 years in connection with some

crime. On 17.04.2020 he came home on Bail at around 8-9

at Night. On 18.04.2020, Amandeep Came to me when I

was doing house chores and told me that he is going to

market to buy Kurkure and he also took my Mobile Phone

with SIM number 97805-54297 along with him. When he

 9

did not returned even after long time, I called him from my

house mobile phone no 79862-52496, thereby he told me

that he will be returning in Half an hour, when even after

half an hour he did not returned I tried calling him form

House Mobile, but he did not picked up my calls. At about

12:30 I received a phone call from some unknown person

that my son is lying unconscious near 40 Railway Quarter

Jalandhar. Immediately thereafter I received a call at House

Mobile No. 79862-52496, from Mobile No. 97805-54297,

The call was by a boy named Musu, and he told me that my

child had consumed Drugs and has now been administered

some water. Hurriedly I along with my brother Rajesh Singh

S/o Mohan Singh, resident of Bashipura, Jalandhar rushed

towards my Son, and admitted my Son to Civil Hospital,

Jalandhar, where during the treatment he died at around

10 PM. I have already recorded my statement with you

regarding the death of my child, but due to being shocked

because of his sudden demise, I was not able to record the

full statement. But now I along with my brother Rajesh

Singh was going to police station to record the full

statement, but now as you have met me here I am telling

you this that: Sandeed Singh @ Musu, S/o Sakandar Singh,

Resident of Muhalla Prem nagar Jalandhar, whom I know

because of his old association with my Son as they used to

roam around together, has along with his few other

associate or associates has caused the death of my precious

 10

child Amandeep Singh @ Kali by administering his drug in

excess. Strict action must be taken against them. Statement

recorded to you and the same is correct. Sd/- (English)

Rupa Chauhan, Sd/- (English) Rajesh Singh. Verified by

Sukhchain Singh SI, PS Navi Baradari, Jalandhar. Dated

19.04.2020.

True Translated Copy

Advocate