Allowed

Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC15 May 2013CRM-M/11130/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Court considered arguments that witnesses had not supported the prosecution and co-accused were already on bail. Finding no grounds for the petitioner to abscond, the Court allowed regular bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Instant application for regular bail allowed; Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Tarn Taran.

Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM No.M-11130 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-11130 of 2013 (O&M)

¶5

Date of Decision: May 15, 2013.

¶6

Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda

¶7

..........PETITIONER(s).

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

State of Punjab

¶10

..........RESPONDENT(s).

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶12

Present: Mr. R.S. Bains, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. P.S. Paul, D.A.G., Punjab.

¶14

¶15

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶16

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.74 dated 15.06.2011 registered under Sections 302, 307, 324, 148, 149, 120-B of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 323, 325, 326 IPC added later on in the challan) registered at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran, Punjab.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through

¶18

the record.

¶19

CRM No.M-11130 of 2013

¶20

-2-

¶21

It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that main witnesses have already been examined and they have not supported the prosecution case. Further submitted that bail has already been granted to co-accused Amarjit Singh, Gurpal Singh @ Pala @ Rachhpal Singh, Puran Singh and Gursharan Singh by this Court vide order dated 13.03.2013 passed in Crl. Misc. No.M-37146 of 2012, Crl. Misc. No.M4734 of 2013 and Crl. Misc. No.M-6561 of 2013 on that basis only and the case of present petitioner is similar to them. Further contended that petitioner has been continuing in custody since 7.1.2012.

¶22

This factual position has not been disputed by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI Nirmal Singh.

¶23

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

¶24

Hence, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant application for regular bail filed on behalf of Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda is allowed.

¶25

Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Tarn Taran.

¶26

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶27

May 15, 2013. Sachin M.

Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbinder Singh @ Shinda 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

Vikram @ Gandhi and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Mukhtiar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Lucky and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kasamdin Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Charanjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Jatinder Singh Dua Vs Ut of Chandigarh