In a petition for anticipatory bail regarding a land dispute FIR involving armed attack, the court dismissed the plea due to the petitioner's apprehended evasion of arrest, noting lack of authority supporting the claim regarding the specific intent to kill.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed as the petitioner is evading arrest.
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
Criminal Misc. M-30570 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. M-30570 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision:16th January, 2012
Kewal Singh
.......Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
........Respondent
BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
Present: Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, DAG, Punjab for the respondent – State.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No
Vijender Singh Malik, J.(Oral)
This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered by
way of FIR No. 46, dated 03.05.2011 at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran for an offence punishable under sections 307, 379 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The case is of a land dispute where the petitioner had fired a shot upon Balkar Singh.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
Criminal Misc. M-30570 of 2011
2
distance between the petitioner and the injured is 800 feet. According to him, by firing a shot from such a distance, the petitioner cannot be said to have done so with the intention to kill him and section 307 IPC, is, therefore, not attracted to the facts of this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has not supported himself by any authority on this point. Keeping in view the other facts mentioned as above, as also that the petitioner is evading arrest in this case in which fire arm has been used, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.
[VIJENDER SINGH MALIK] JUDGE
16th January, 2012 Shivani Kaushik
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the petitioner is evading arrest in a case involving use of a firearm.
Whether the distance between the petitioner and the victim negates the intention to kill under section 307 IPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kewal Singh
State of Punjab
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
