Satnam Singh v. State of Punjab
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court discharged the petitioner on regular bail in a case of abducting a minor girl for marriage (IPC Ss 363, 366A, 376). Noting no witnesses had been examined by prosecution, bail was granted on personal bond and surety.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner admitted to regular bail on personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No. M-8979 of 2011
Date of Decision : 15.7.2011
Satnam Singh
….. Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
….. Respondent
Present : Mr. R.P. Kansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. US Dhaliwal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.
S.S. SARON, J.
Heard counsel for the parties.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 17.8.2010 for the offences under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 342, 506 and 120-B IPC.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for regular bail after initial bail was granted for a subset of charges.
Whether the lack of examination of prosecution witnesses justifies granting regular bail.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Satnam Singh
- respondent
State of Punjab
Coram
S.S. Saron
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRM-M/8979/2011
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court