Allowed

Neela Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Aug 2012CRM-M/19610/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Courts granted bail pending trial to the petitioner in a murder case, relying on the precedent in Sanjay Chandra versus CBI. The court noted that while other co-accused had been granted bail previously, the petitioner caused no injury to the deceased and no prosecution witness had examined, warranting bailable status.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is directed to be released on bail pending trial to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

Neela Singh Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M-19610 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No. M-19610 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.8.2012

Neela Singh

.....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

¶11

Present : Mr. S.K.Jain, Advocate

¶12

for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Deepak Balyan, Additional A.G., Punjab.

¶14

Mr. P.K.S.Phoolka, Advocate for the complainant.

¶15

¶16

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL)

¶17

The petitioner seeks bail pending trial, by way of instant petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in the case arising out of FIR No. 56 dated 12.9.2011, under Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 323, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, District Mansa.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has granted the concession of bail to his co-accused, Jagtar Singh vide order dated 12.3.2012 (Annexure P-3), Seera @ Jagsir Singh vide order dated 21.5.2012 (Annexure P-4) and Avtar @ Tar Singh vide order dated 14.5.2012 (Annexure P-5).

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner has not caused any injury to the deceased. He has been attributed only one injury on the elbow of left hand of the

¶20

¶21

Criminal Misc. No. M-19610 of 2012

¶22

complainant which has been found to be grievous in nature. He also submits that petitioner is inside the jail for the last more than 11 months.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner concluded by submitting that since trial will take considerable long time and even a single PW has not been examined so far, the instant petition deserves to be accepted.

¶24

Per contra, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the complainant submit that case of the petitioner is not similar to that of Jagtar Singh, Seera @ Jagsir Singh and Avtar Singh @ Tar Singh. They further submit that since the petitioner has been attributed a sharp weapon and grievous injury, he is not entitled for the concession of bail pending trial

¶25

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is just and expedient to extend the benefit of concession of bail pending trial, to the petitioner. I say so because of more than one reasons, being recorded hereinafter.

¶26

Firstly, it has gone undisputed that three co-accused of the petitioner have been granted concession of bail by this Court vide orders dated 12.3.2012 (Annexure P-3), 21.5.2012 (Annexure P-4) and 14.5.2012 (Annexure P-5). Secondly, the petitioner is inside the jail for the last more than 11 months.

¶27

Thirdly, it is also undisputed that no injury was caused by the petitioner to the deceased. He has caused only one injury to the complainant and that too on the non vital part of the body. Further,

¶28

¶29

Criminal Misc. No. M-19610 of 2012

¶30

the trial will take considerable long time because prosecution evidence is yet to start.

¶31

The view taken by this Court also finds support from the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra versus CBI, 2011 (4) RCR (criminal) 896.

¶32

Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, petitioner is directed to be released on bail pending trial to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

¶33

Resultantly, the instant petition is allowed.

¶34

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶35

23.8.2012 Ak Sharma

¶36

Criminal Misc. No. M-19610 of 2012 4

Neela Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neela Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhupinder Singh Vs State of Haryana

Krishna Vs State of Punjab

Kanwaljit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab

Tarsem Singh Vs State of Punjab

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Haryana