The single-judge High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a regular bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. due to apprehension of evidence tampering and the seriousness of the charges at the preliminary stage.
The petition for regular bail was dismissed.
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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-10495 of 2017
Date of decision:5.4.2017
Gobind Rai alias Gopi
...Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
...Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. Narinder S. Lucky, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.
Inderjit Singh, J.
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.25 dated 13.2.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 307, 506, 427, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Navi Baradari, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar.
Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State and have gone through the record.
Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.04.06 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-10495 of 2017
[2]
From the record, I find that the present petitioner is named in the FIR. He was stated to be armed with a Kirpan' and he attacked the complainant with Kirpan' which hit on his forehead and second blow with `Kirpan' was given by co-accused on the backside of his head. Other coaccused also gave injuries to the complainant. The injury dangerous to life has been attributed to the present petitioner. The challan has been presented and the case is at preliminary stage as charges have not been framed yet. If the petitioner is granted the bail at this stage, there is every apprehension that he may tamper with the evidence. Otherwise also, he being the main accused, I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail at this stage.
Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is
dismissed.
April 5, 2017. (Inderjit Singh) Judge hsp NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No
Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.04.06 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail at the preliminary stage when there is apprehension of tampering with evidence.
Whether the case falls under the category where bail benefits are applicable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gobind Rai alias Gopi
State of Punjab
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
