Allowed

Surinder Kumar @ Lovely v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Feb 2013CRM-M/2205/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed regular bail petitions filed by two accused in a case involving culpable homicide and cheating. Court observed that co-accused had already been granted bail, no investigation was complete, and prolonged detention served no purpose.

What did the court decide?

Petitions for regular bail accepted; petitioners ordered to be released upon furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Surinder Kumar @ Lovely Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM No.M-2205 of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CRM No.M-2205 of 2013(O&M) Surinder Kumar @ Lovely .....Petitioner

¶2

Versus

¶3

State of Punjab .....Respondent (2) CRM No.M-3095 of 2013(O&M) Kashmir Singh @ Pannu .....Petitioner Versus

¶4

State of Punjab .....Respondent Date of Decision:07.02.2013

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.

¶6

Present: Mr.Amandeep Singh Manaise and Mr.Ritesh Pandey, Advocates, for the petitioner(s).

¶7

Mr.Raj Preet Singh Sidhu, Asstt.Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State.

¶8

¶9

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)

¶10

As, identical points for consideration to grant regular bail or otherwise to petitioners-Surinder Kumar @ Lovely and Kashmir Singh @ Pannu are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated petitions, arising out of the same case/FIR, by means of this common order, to avoid the repetition.

¶11

The petitioners have preferred the instant separate petitions for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against them along with their other co-accused, namely, Satinder Singh @ Kinda and Gurdeep Singh @ Lappi, by virtue of FIR No.211 dated 08.08.2012, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 304, 328 IPC and

¶12

CRM No.M-2205 of 2013 2

¶13

Section 61 of the Excise Act, 1914, by the police of Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Gurdaspur, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Notices of the petitions were issued to the State.

¶15

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petitions for regular bail deserve to be accepted in this context.

¶16

What cannot possibly be disputed here is that Satinder Singh @ Kinda and Gurdeep Singh @ Lappi, co-accused of the petitioners, have already been allowed regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court(Ritu Bahri, J.), by way of order dated 22.11.2012, rendered in CRM No.M-33068 of 2012(Annexure P-3) and order dated 18.12.2012 in CRM No.M-38356 of 2012(Annexure P-4). Once the indicated coaccused of the petitioners have already been granted the concession of regular bail, so, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit of regular bail to the present petitioners under the same set of circumstances.

¶17

Moreover, petitioner-Surinder Kumar @ Lovely was arrested on 05.12.2012, whereas petitioner-Kashmir Singh @ Pannu was arrested on 08.08.2012. Since then they are in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served in further detaining them in jail. There is no history of their previous involvement in any other criminal case. Even since not a single witness has yet been examined by the prosecution, so, the conclusion of trial would naturally take a long time.

¶18

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the

¶19

CRM No.M-2205 of 2013 3

¶20

totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petitions for regular bail are hereby accepted. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶21

February 07, 2013 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) seema JUDGE

Surinder Kumar @ Lovely v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surinder Kumar @ Lovely 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

Hardev Singh & Ors. Vs Addl. Director & Anr.

Mukhtiar Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Shankar Dass Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ram Dia Vs Director Consolidation Haryana and Ors.

Sharuti Kant Arya Vs State of Punjab