The Single Judge dismissed an application for anticipatory bail. The Court held that since the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender, she was disentitled from anticipatory bail as fortified by Supreme Court precedents.
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
CRM-M-482 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:-14.1.2021
Ranjit Kaur
… Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
(proceedings conducted through video conferencing)
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J
KAMAL KUMAR 2021.01.18 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 CRM-M-482-2021 (O&M)
also standing nearby who had gestured towards complainant's husband Baldev Singh. It is further alleged that another 8-9 persons were also present there with muffled faces and who were also armed with 'guns' and 'pistols' . Ranjit Kaur (petitioner) is alleged to have raised a lalkara exhorting the co-accused to teach Baldev Singh a lesson for raising demand of land and upon which the accused Sukhdev Singh, Amanat Singh, Manjinder Singh, Kashmir Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Hoshiar Singh started firing at Baldev Singh. The unknown persons dragged Baldev Singh by hair and gave blows with butts of their guns while Ranjit Kaur gave blows to him with baseball bat.
KAMAL KUMAR 2021.01.18 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 CRM-M-482-2021 (O&M)
from which it could be inferred that the petitioner has been falsely roped in whereas the cited case was at appellate stage when the entire evidence stood recorded.
| 14.1.2021 | (Gurvinder Singh Gill) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| kamal | Judge | ||
| Whether speaking /reasoned | Yes | / No | |
| Whether Reportable | Yes | / No |
KAMAL KUMAR 2021.01.18 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who has been declared a proclaimed offender in FIR case under IPC and Arms Act.
Whether the cited Madras High Court judgment allows the petitioner to be falsely implicated as an accessory since the entire case is not yet over?.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kanwal Singh and others Versus State of HaryanaDistinguished¶18
2006(3) RCR (Criminal) 783
Lavesh versus State (NCT of Delhi)Relied on¶23
2012 (8) SCC 730 · Who else cites this
State of Madhya Pradesh versus Pradeep Sharma - 2014(2) SCC 171Distinguished¶23
Ranjit Kaur
State of Punjab
Gurvinder Singh Gill
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
