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

2022 Supreme(P&H) 32

ANOOP CHITKARA
Akashdeep Singh @ Ghughi – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Achin Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG

JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara, J.

FIR No.

Dated

Police Station

Sections

131

19.10.2021

City Rampura, District Bathinda

341, 323, 148 & 149 IPC (Sections 308 & 325 IPC added later on)

1. The petitioners apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above have come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In Para 9 of the bail petition, the petitioners declare no criminal history. The petitioners did not disclose criminal antecedents in the petition; however, Ld. Counsel appearing for the petitioners states on instruction that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners contend that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioners and family.

4. On instructions from ASI Jagtar Singh, learned State counsel opposed the bail.

REASONING:

5. The complainant alleged that when he was going on his bike then the accused persons attacked him and gave him beatings including his head. He attributed injuries upon a

    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