Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 1103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Harnaresh Singh Gill, J.
Ajay Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M No. 17955 of 2021
Decided On : 07-07-2021
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
DISASTER MANAGEMENT ACT : S.51
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.307, S.379(b), S.353, S.186, S.188, S.148, S.149, S.34
Headnote
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the petitioner in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, Arms Act, and Disaster Management Act, considering the petitioner's prolonged custody, lack of specific allegations against him, and the delay in trial due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, Arms Act, and Disaster Management Act, citing lack of specific allegations against him and prolonged custody.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail, considering the prolonged custody and the delay in trial due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's lack of specific allegations against him, prolonged custody, and the delay in trial due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner, his prolonged custody, and the delay in trial due to the Covid-19 pandemic as grounds for granting bail.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
Rajesh Bhatheja, Advocate, H.S. Sitta, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Harnaresh Singh Gill, J. - Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 234 dated 6.12.2020 under Sections 307, 379-B, 353, 186, 188, 148, 149, 34 IPC, Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, registered at Police Station Dharmkot, District Moga.
3. Custody certificate by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent(S), Central Prison, Faridkot has been filed through e-mail. Copy of the same is taken on record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and has been nominated in the present FIR on 08.12.2020; that neither any role has been attributed to the petitioner nor he was present at the spot when the alleged occurrence took place; that the petitioner has been in custody for the last 61/2 months; and that no other case is pending against him.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioner and the other co-accused and that the challan has been presented in this case.
6. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 06 months and 15 days. Challan has been presented in the present case. The trial will take time to conclude because of Covid-19 pandemic. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.
7. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
