Allowed

Balkar Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Mar 2013CRM-M/32258/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the petitioners, Balkar Singh and Harpal Singh, indicted for offences under Sections 148, 307, 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The order was issued in view of the totality of facts, noting that key witnesses did not support the prosecution case and the injury was attributed to a non-applicant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of trial subject to furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Magistrate.

Balkar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Criminal Misc. No.32258 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No.32258 of 2012 Date of Decision: 01^st March, 2013

Balkar Singh & Anr.

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr.Manoj Sharma, Advocate, for Ms.G.K.Mann, Advocate,

¶12

for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr.Piyush Bansal, DAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State.

¶14

Ms.Rupinder Kaur Thind, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶15

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.

¶16

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to petitioners-Balkar Singh and Harpal Singh, who have been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148 and 307 read with Section 149, IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act in a case arising out of FIR No.65, dated 17.05.2012, registered at Police Station, Ajnala, District Amritsar.

¶17

Learned counsel contends that no specific role has been assigned to the petitioners. He further contends that the petitioners are behind the bars from 17.05.2012. He also contends that the two main witnesses, namely, Dharminder Singh and Ranjit Singh who had appeared as prosecution evidence before the learned trial court on 10.12.2012, did not support the

¶18

Criminal Misc. No.32258 of 2012

¶19

¶20

prosecution case.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Balbir Singh, Police Station, Ajnala, District Amritsar, submits that as many as six material witnesses have already been examined, therefore, the petitioners may not be released on bail.

¶22

Learned counsel for the complainant has also opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners.

¶23

Heard.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State, on a specific query by this Court, fairly concedes that the injury attracting the mischief of Section 307, IPC received by Ajit Singh has been attributed to non-applicant-Nishan Singh. He also concedes that the petitioners are behind the bars from 17.05.2012. The main witnesses have already been examined. The applicability of Section 307, IPC would be a moot point during the course of trial.

¶25

Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioners-Balkar Singh and Harpal Singh, both sons of Sh.Mangal Singh, r/o Village Kohali, PS Lopoke, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, are ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial of this case, subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar.

¶26

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE

¶27

March 01, 2013 seema

¶28

Criminal Misc. No.32258 of 2012 3

Balkar Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balkar Singh and 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

Lakhvir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Harmit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Mohd. Salim & Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Anupam Vs State of Haryana

Bhushan Gir and Anr. Vs State of Punjab