SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(HP) 113

SURJIT SINGH
RAJESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Chaudhary, Additional Advocate General for the respondent.

JUDGEMENT

Surjit Singh, Judge (Oral):- Heard and gone through the record.

2. The applicant was taken into custody, as an accused, in a case, under Sections 395,323,342, 411, 412,414, 596 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, alongwith some other persons in four cases. He applied for becoming approver during the course of the investigation. Pardon was tendered to him.

3. The applicant has been in custody since February 2005. Trial has now commenced in all the four cases. Statement of the applicant, as a witness, in the course of the trial has been recorded in all the cases. He has now applied for his release (on bail).

4. The submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that keeping the applicant in detention for too long would amount to depriving him of his liberty, even though he is no longer an accused and as an approver also his statement has been recorded. He says that since the applicant himself has sought his release, it can be presumed that he does not have any fear, apprehension or even potential threat of danger to his life at the hands of those against whom he has deposed, by turning approver. His submission is that keeping an approver in detention for too long




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top