Gurdeep Singh @ Kala v. State of Punjab
Regular bail – Petitioner's involvement in other criminal cases
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court Chandigarh order on a regular bail application. Core ruling: the petitioner's involvement in other criminal cases cannot by itself be a sufficient ground to decline regular bail in the FIR in question; bail must be granted or refused on the facts and circumstances of the specific FIR. Relies on Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477; Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, CRM-M No.388222022, decided on 29.11.2021; and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Keywords: regular bail, antecedents, other FIRs, multiple cases, concession of bail.
What did the court decide?
The fact of the petitioner's involvement in other criminal cases cannot, by itself, be a sufficient ground to decline the concession of regular bail in the FIR in question; the bail claim must be decided by ratiocinating upon the facts and circumstances of that FIR, for which reliance was placed on Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi (Supreme Court), Sridhar Das (Calcutta High Court, Division Bench), and Akhilesh Singh and Balraj (this Court).