Allowed

Gurbinder Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Jun 2021CRM-M/19033/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Chandigarh allowed a bail petition under Section 437 CrPC for an accused facing charges under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC and POCSO. Release was granted as key prosecution witnesses declared themselves hostile and prolonged continued custody served no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

Order releasing the petitioner on bail by furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court or Duty Magistrate.

Gurbinder Singh Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M No. 19033 of 2021

¶2

-1-

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

CRM-M No. 19033 of 2021 Date of Decision: 21.6.2021

¶5

Gurbinder Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

¶10

Present: Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Avtar Singh Sandu, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶12

¶13

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

¶15

The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 69 dated 28.8.2019 under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 IPC registered at Police Station Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur.

¶16

Custody certificate by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent, Central Jail, Kapurthala has been filed through e-mail. Copy of the same is taken on record.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been in custody since 29.8.2019. He further submits that the victim/prosecutrix and the complainant i.e. her father, Satnam Singh have appeared in the witness box as PW-1 and PW-2, respectively but they did not support the prosecution case and have been declared hostile on 19.2.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the affidavit of the victim/prosecutrix dated 23.9.2020, wherein she stated that

¶18

GURPREET SINGH 2021.06.21 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh

¶19

CRM-M No. 19033 of 2021 -2-

¶20

she is major and the present FIR was got registered by her father in heist without inquiring the matter and she does not want to pursue the legal proceedings against Gurbinder Singh (petitioner).

¶21

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Gurwinder Singh, submits that the age of the victim, at the time of occurrence, was 17 years, 03 months and 26 days. However, he has not disputed the fact that the prosecution witnesses i.e. victim/prosecutrix (PW-1) and the complainant i.e. her father Satnam Singh (PW-2) have been declared hostile by the trial Court.

¶22

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

In the present case, the prosecutrix as well as the complainant i.e. father of the prosecutrix have not supported the prosecution version while appearing in the witness box as PW-1 and PW-2, respectively, and have been declared hostile. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody from the last 01 year, 09 months and 20 days. The trial will take time to conclude because of Covid-19 pandemic. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

¶24

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

¶25

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE

¶26

June 21, 2021 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶27

GURPREET SINGH 2021.06.21 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh

Gurbinder Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbinder 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

Bansal Departmental Store and Anr. Vs Sewak Singh

Gurwinder Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab

Mohammad Ishtiak @ Toofan Vs State of Punjab

Himanshu Pandhi Vs State of Haryana

Mahua Bhattacharya Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Nisha Rani and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others