Petitioner challenged anticipatory bail in an attempt to murder case. Court rejected argument regarding name discrepancy in FIR and deemed delay immaterial due to serious charge of life imprisonment. Bail denied as no exceptional circumstances existed.
Petitioner not granted anticipatory bail; petition 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.
Crl.M.No. M- 16832 of 2012 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.M.No. M- 16832 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.11.2012
Baljinder Singh @ Vicky
................Petitioner vs. State of Punjab
.................Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri
Present: Sh. S.S. Majithia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Sh.Sandeep Chhabra, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Sh. G.P.S. Bal, Advocate for the complainant.
K.C. Puri, J.
As per allegation of the prosecution 34 injuries were found on the person of the complainant and 6 injuries have been attributed to the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR, as his name is Baljinder Singh and his name is mentioned as Manjinder Singh in the FIR.
However, this argument is devoid of any merit as nick name
Crl.M.No. M- 16832 of 2012 -2-
of the petitioner is mentioned.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that there is a delay of 6 days in lodging the FIR. However, that argument also cannot be given weightage at this stage. The case is under Section 307 IPC, which is punishable with life imprisonment.
Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that no grievous injury has been attributed to the petitioner, so he is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.
I have considered the said submission. Number of injuries on the person of the complainant depict the intention of the petitioner alongwith co-accused.
So, no exceptional circumstance for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
Consequently, the petition stands dismissed.
( K.C. Puri ) Judge
19.11.2012 chugh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail considering the nature of injuries and delay in lodging FIR.
Whether a delay of six days in lodging an FIR rendered the case vulnerable to bail concession.
Baljinder Singh @ Vicky
State of Punjab
K.C. Puri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
