Allowed

Gurtej Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Dec 2018CRM-M/32326/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in a case involving Sections 376 IPC and POCSO, noting that the material witness had been examined and the trial would take time, subject to standard bail conditions and regarding a separate complaint filed against the respondent-State.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate subject to conditions regarding absence, leaving the country,

Gurtej Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRM-M-32326-2018

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-32326-2018 Date of Decision: 18.12.2018

Gurtej Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶12

Present:Mr.P.S. Paul, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Ms. Rajni Gupta, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶14

Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶15

¶16

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)

¶17

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner herein in case FIR No.4 dated 06.01.2018 under Sections 354, 341, 458, 376 and 511 IPC (offence under Sections 341, 458, 376 and 511 IPC added later on) and Section 8 of the POCSO Act registered at Police Station Balongi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this is a case of false implication only to extort money from the petitioner while also submitting that statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded in Court in

¶19

SATYAWAN 2018.12.18 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-32326-2018

¶21

-2-

¶22

which she has made major improvements.

¶23

Appearance has been caused by Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant, who submits that the family of the petitioner is pressurizing them to compromise the matter and in this regard a complaint has already been filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the grant of regular bail, however, does not dispute the fact that the statement of the material witnesses, namely, the prosecutrix has been recorded.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶26

In view of the fact that the petitioner herein has been incarcerated since 08.04.2018, the material witness, namely the prosecutrix has been examined and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, the present petition is allowed. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, concerned subject to following terms:-

¶27

(i) The petitioner shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

¶28

(ii) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the petitioner shall stand withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the accused shall have to apply for bail afresh before the trial Court.

¶29

SATYAWAN 2018.12.18 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶30

CRM-M-32326-2018

¶31

-3-

¶32

(iii) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

¶33

However, before parting with this order the respondent-State is

¶34

directed to look into the complaint that has been filed by the complainant and, if so required, take appropriate action thereon.

¶35

18.12.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes. Whether reportable No.

¶36

SATYAWAN 2018.12.18 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Gurtej Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurtej Singh 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

(O&M) Mukesh Devi and Others Vs Nar Singh and Others

Nanhi Devi Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.

Balwinder Kaur @ Bindo Vs State of Punjab

Dinesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Orss

Inderjeet Kaur Tatla @ Amarjeet Kaur Tatla Vs State of Punjab

Naveen Vs State of Haryana