Disposed

Gobind Ram v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Nov 2024CRM-M/5974/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition under Section 439 CrPC by an accused under Sections 302 and 323 IPC who had been in custody for about three years and eight months. The Court did not decide bail; instead it directed the trial court to conclude examination of the six remaining prosecution witnesses within three months and the SSP to ensure witnesses' presence.

What the court decided

AI extract

Gobind Ram Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

212

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-5974-2024

¶4

Date of Decision : 12.11.2024

GOBIND RAM

.....Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶11

Present : Mr. Harpreet Maini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral)

¶14

Through the instant petition, filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking the relief of 'regular bail' by the petitioner in case FIR No.58, dated 06.03.2021, under Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib (Annexure P-1).

¶15

Today, learned State counsel, on instructions imparted to him by the police official concerned, informs this Court that in the final report the prosecution has cited total 26 witnesses, out of which 16 witnesses already stands examined, whereas 4 witnesses have been give up by the prosecution, and now only 06 witnesses are remaining to be examined.

¶16

He has also placed on record a custody certificate qua the present petitioner today in court, which is taken on record. A perusal thereof, reflects that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 03 years

¶17

CRM-M-5974-2024

¶18

-2-

¶19

and 08 months, as on today and he is not involved in any other criminal case.

¶20

Considering the days of incarceration as suffered by the present petitioner as per the custody certificate ( supra ), this Court deems it appropriate to pass a direction upon the learned trial court concerned, to make its all efforts to examine, the remaining 06 prosecution witnesses, within a period of 03 months from today.

¶21

The Senior Superintendent of Police concerned, is also directed to ensure the presence of all the remaining the prosecution witnesses as and when called upon by the learned trial Court concerned, for recording of their statements.

¶22

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned trial court concerned as well as the Senior Superintendent of Police concerned, for making its compliance.

¶23

All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶24

November	12, 2024	(KU
dharamvir
	Whether speaking/reasoned.	: Yes/No
	Whether Reportable.	: Yes/No

Gobind Ram v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Gobind Ram v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankur Babbar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Anil Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Shehbaj Singh @ Saheji Sharma and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Rajnish Kumar and Ors. Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Nok Singh Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Ors.

Ajay Alias Goldy Vs State of Haryana