In Crl. Misc. No. M-12053 of 2011, a bail application was filed by Kanta Devi @ Shakuntla Devi. Justice Rajesh Bindal of the Punjab and Haryana High Court denied release on bail because the prosecution witnesses were being recorded and evidence was expected within two months.
Petitioner's request for bail was dismissed.
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.
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-12053 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 26.7.2011
Kanta Devi @ Shakuntla Devi
..Petitioner.
Vs.
State of Punjab
..Respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present : Mr.Deep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Sandhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal, J.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that seven prosecution witnesses out of 14 witnesses have already been recorded. The case is fixed for today before the Court below. He further submitted that the entire prosecution evidence shall be concluded within two months.
Considering the aforesaid stand, I do not find it to be a fit case to release the petitioner on bail at this stage.
Dismissed.
( Rajesh Bindal ) 26.7.2011 Judge Meenu
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for bail during the pendency of the trial.
Kanta Devi @ Shakuntla Devi
State of Punjab
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
