Single judge order dismissing bail petition without appreciating evidence. Court directed trial court to expedite disposal due to petitioner's custody since 2006.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Cr.Misc. NO. M 12051 of 2008
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Cr.Misc. NO. M 12051 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION 20.3.2009
Kundan Kumar
......PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of of Punjab
......RESPONDENTS
PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate Mr. PS Sidhu, Addl.A.G.Punjab
M.M.S.BEDI,J.
The petitioner along with Sunny and other companions is alleged to have given beating to Suresh Parshad. While Suresh Parshad ran for saving his life towards the second floor from the third floor, the deceased Mohd. Harun, who was coming down from the stairs stopped the petitioner, Sunny and their companions, on which all the said persons left Suresh Parshad and threw Mohd. Harun down by giving him a push from the second floor and started giving him beatings. Co-accused of the petitioner Sunny had allegedly hit Mohd. Harun with a screw driver.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there is a contradiction in the medical and ocular version. Referring to the statement of the Doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that except for the screw driver injury, there is no injury on the person of the deceased, thus creating a doubt regarding the petitioner having participated in the occurrence of beating and hitting the deceased.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not deem
Cr.Misc. NO. M 12051 of 2008
2
it appropriate to appreciate the evidence at this stage, lest it should prejudice the final adjudication of the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 25.6.2006.
In view of the said circumstances, a direction is issued to the trial court to expeditiously dispose of the trial.
The petition is dismissed at this stage.
March 20 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should appreciate evidence in a criminal bail petition to assess contradiction between medical and ocular versions.
Whether expedited disposal of the trial was necessary given the petitioner's prolonged custody.
Kundan Kumar
State of Punjab
M.M.S. BEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
