Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.
Raj Kumar @ Raja - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
Cr M M No. 11012 of 2021
Decided On : 14-07-2021
Bail - Criminal Law - Regular Bail - Delay in registering DDR - Covid-19 pandemic - Concession of regular bail granted
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) after being in custody for over five months. The petitioner's counsel argued that it was a case of version and cross-version, with a delay in registering the DDR. The co-accused was injured, and the petitioner was attributed a blow above the right ear of the injured.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the delay in custody, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the likelihood of trial taking time, granted the concession of regular bail to the petitioner without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues: Delay in custody, Covid-19 pandemic, likelihood of trial taking time
Ratio Decidendi: The court deemed it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner due to the delay in custody, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the likelihood of trial taking time.
Final Decision: The court allowed the instant petition and ordered the petitioner to be released on regular bail upon furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
JUDGMENT
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. - The petitioner is seeking regular bail in DDR No.22 dated 28.07.2020, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 341, 148 and 149 IPC in FIR No.93 dated 22.07.2020 under Sections 324, 323, 341, 148 and 149 IPC registered at Police Station Mehtiana, District Hoshiarpur.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is a case of version and cross-version and there is a delay of six days in registering the DDR. Co-accused Rupinder Singh was injured in the incident and the petitioner has been attributed a datar blow above the right ear of the injured who has fully recovered from the injury. He further contends that the petitioner is 22 years of age and is in custody for over five months. He also contends that the father of the petitioner has expired yesterday and he has to perform the last rites.
3. Learned State counsel, upon instructions from ASI Gulshan Kumar, states that although challan has been filed but no prosecution witness has been examined. He also contends that it has been verified that the father of the petitioner has indeed expired yesterday.
4. Heard through video conferencing.
5. In view of the above especially when it is a case of version and cross-version, the petitioner is in custody for over five months, the Covid-19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.
6. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
CRM-M-20520-2021
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this application has been rendered infructuous as the petitioner has been granted regular bail.
8. The application is disposed of as infructuous.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
