The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioner, noting he has been in custody for over a year, the charge is simple, and there is no evidence of tampering with justice.
Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety.
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.
1
Crl. Misc. No. M-11725 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
**Crl. Misc. No. M-11725 of 2012 Date of Decision: 13.07.2012 *****
Naresh Kumar .. Petitioner
VS.
State of Punjab .. Respondent
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
Present:Mr. P.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.
**Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab. *****
VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J(ORAL).
Naresh Kumar , the petitioner has sought regular bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 27 dated 30.1.2011 at Police Station City Kotkapura, District Faridkot for an offence punishable under sections 148, 308, 323, 341 and 120-B IPC read with section 149 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. According to him, his name was given by the complainant after three days of the occurrence. According to him, the weapons alleged to have been used by the petitioner and others are planted weapons. He further submits that injuries resulting to the complainant and another victim are simple. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 28.6.2011 and the trial is still to make any progress.
Learned State counsel, on the instructions of ASI Harphool Singh, submits that charge has already been framed in the
2
Crl. Misc. No. M-11725 of 2012
case and the case is now fixed for 25.7.2012 for prosecution evidence. He, however, admits that the injuries suffered by the complainant and the injured are simple and have been caused by blunt weapon.
The injuries attributed to the petitioner, who is even not named in the FIR, as also the other injuries are simple. At the trial, only charge has been framed and no witness has been examined so far. At least one thing is clear from the above submissions that the investigation part is over and there is no apprehension about the petitioner tampering with the evidence. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than one year, I find the petitioner to be entitled to bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
July 13,2012 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) Jiten JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, who has been in custody for over a year without progress in trial and is not named in the FIR, is entitled to regular bail.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Naresh Kumar
State of Punjab
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
