The High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, mother-in-law of the main accused, in a criminal trial where evidence was not concluded. The court deemed it appropriate to grant bail without commenting on the merits.
Grant of bail to the satisfaction of the trial court/Duty Magistrate, Chandigarh.
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.
Crl. Misc No. M 15185 of 2011
::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc No. M 15185 of 2011 Date of decision : October 14, 2011
Sunaina,
...... Petitioner
v.
State of U.T.Chandigarh,
...... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr. A.K.Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate for Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?
AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral)
The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR No.180, dated 27.7.2010, registered under Section 304 of the IPC, at Police Station Manimajra, Chandigarh.
The petitioner is the mother-in-law who has been in custody since 27.7.2010.
On 16.8.2011, the following order was passed :-
“ It is stated that only five witnesses including three doctors, one lady Constable and an ASI are yet to be examined. The case is now stated to be listed for 1.9.2011 before the trial Court
Learned counsel for the U.T.Administration, on instructions from Amarjit Singh, ASI, states that one out
Crl. Misc No. M 15185 of 2011
::2::
of the three doctors has gone abroad and can be given up or substituted by another doctor to prove the post-mortem report.
That being so, let the lady Constable, the ASI and the remaining two doctors and/or another doctor in place of the left out doctor shall be produced for their examination on the date fixed before the trial Court i.e 01.09.2011.
The learned trial Court shall record the statements of the above-mentioned witnesses on the date fixed. List on 13.9.2011.”
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the evidence has yet
not been concluded, rather a supplementary challan has been filed.
Counsel for the respondent has accepted the factual assertion.
It is not disputed that the main accused viz the son of the petitioner is in custody. In these circumstances, without commenting upon the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner.
Bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate,
Chandigarh.
Petition stands disposed of.
( AJAY TEWARI ) October 14, 2011. JUDGE `kk'
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant regular bail to a petitioner-in-law in instituted criminal proceedings where the main accused is in custody.
How to handle the requirement to produce remaining witnesses before the trial court is concluded.
Sunaina
State of U.T.Chandigarh
Ajay Tewari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
