Allowed

Balwinder Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2013CRM-M/10302/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted pre-arrest bail to petitioners in an FIR involving sections of the IPC. The judgment notes a version dispute, no injury attributed to petitioners, and co-accused already on bail, finding petitioners entitled to bail.

What did the court decide?

Petition for pre-arrest bail was allowed, and the interim order granting anticipatory bail was made absolute.

Balwinder Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Criminal Misc. No. M-10302 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No. M-10302 of 2013 Date of decision:-27.05.2013

¶5

Balwinder Singh @ Bablu and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

¶11

Present:Mr. J.S. Thind, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Amit Chaudhary, DAG Punjab.

¶13

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK J.(Oral)

¶14

Balwinder Singh @ Bablu and Mann Singh, the petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 125 dated 30.10.2009, under Sections 323, 324, 354, 326, 148, 149 and 506 IPC, at Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this is a case with version and cross-version. According to him, the petitioners are accused in the cross-version. He further submits that no injury has been attributed to the petitioners. He also submits that six other co-accused of the petitioners have been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court. He has stated that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and their custodial interrogation is not required.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Manjit

¶17

Criminal Misc. No. M-10302 of 2013

¶18

-2-

¶19

Singh, admits that the petitioners have joined the investigation. He further admits that the petitioners are only shown in the FIR having been there with Sarpreet Singh. He also admits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required.

¶20

There are some facts apparent in this case besides the fact that this is a case giving rise to the version and cross-version. The petitioners are accused in the cross-version and there is no injury attributed to them. Their co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. For these reasons, I find the petitioners to be entitled to prearrest bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed and order dated 10.4.2013 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners is made absolute.

¶21

May 27, 2013 ( VIJENDER SINGH MALIK ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

Balwinder Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwinder Singh & Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gladstone Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs India Bulls Financial Services Ltd.

Abhijeet Singh @ Ankur Likhari Vs State of Punjab

Gurbhajan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Haryana

Ravneet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ravi Alias Rubi Vs State of Haryana