The High Court refused to draw an adverse order (positive vs negative) in response to an incomplete question regarding the interpretation of Section 498 of the IPC, upholding the earlier order dated 03.05.2014.
Petition dismissed; restriction on freedom of movement upheld.
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.
CRM No.M-12285 of 2014
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-12285 of 2014 Date of Decision: - 28.05.2014
Jagjit Singh alias Jita
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State.
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral)
Petitioner-Jagjit Singh alias Jita son of Partap Singh, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against him along with his other main co-accused, namely, Devi Sharan @ D.S. Kaka, Gurjit Singh alias Bhatti and Gurdeep Singh @ Geeta etc., vide FIR No. 67 dated 23.06.2011, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 341, 427, and 148 read with Sections 149 & 120-B IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of The Arms Act, by the police of Police Station Nathana, District Bathinda.
Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-12285 of 2014 -2-
through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.
Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-12285 of 2014 -3-
M No.39983 of 2012. Therefore, I see no reason not to extend the concession of regular bail to the present petitioner, who is on better footing.
Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case during trial, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail only.
May 28, 2014 ( M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR) naresh.k JUDGE
Kumar Naresh 2014.05.29 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving offences under sections 302 and 307 IPC.
Whether the petitioner has a sufficient prima facie case to warrant bail and if denying bail would serve any useful purpose.
Whether the petitioner is on a better footing as compared to a similarly situated co-accused who was already granted bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M No.39983 of 2012Followed¶6
Jagjit Singh alias Jita
State of Punjab
Mehender Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
