Allowed

Kamaljeet Kaur v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC8 May 2020CRM-M/9678/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioner in a criminal case involving IPC offences. The court observed that the petitioner had been in custody for five months and no specific role was attributed to her in the FIR, noting the trial would take considerable time.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial court or duty magistrate.

Kamaljeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-9678-2020 Decided on : 08.05.2020

Kamaljit Kaur

. . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab

. . . Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶9

PRESENT: Mr. H.S. Deol, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶10

Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Pardeep Kumar.

¶11

¶12

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

¶13

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 053, dated 07.04.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Urban Estate, Patiala.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has inter alia submitted that the petitioner, who is a lady has been behind bars for almost 05 months. Further, a perusal of the FIR in question clearly reveals that no specific allegations have been levelled against her. It is thus very evident that she has been arrayed as an accused only because she happened to be the wife of the main accused – Navjot Singh. It has been further contended that she is confined in the Central Jail, Patiala, where one COVID-19 positive case too has been found. Hence, she be granted the concession of regular bail due to the prevailing outbreak of COVID-19 and also because the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future.

¶15

Learned State counsel on the other hand has opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. However, she has been unable to

¶16

JAWALA RAM 2020.05.08 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M-9678-2020

¶18

- 2 -

¶19

controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that no specific role has been attributed to her in the FIR in question.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

Having considered the submissions made by either side, the petitioner has been admittedly behind bars for almost 05 months. Hence, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner behind bars, as the trial would take a considerable time to conclude. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶22

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE

¶23

May 08, 2020

¶24

J.Ram

¶25

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶26

JAWALA RAM 2020.05.08 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Kamaljeet Kaur v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamaljeet Kaur 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

Rajender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Davinder Singh Kochar and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Puneet Kamal Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sandeep Kumar @ Kaka Vs State of Punjab

Poonam @ Poona Vs State of Punjab

Pala Singh Vs State of Punjab