Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dilbagh Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Dilbagh Singh vs State of Punjab

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Feb 01, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1042749

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dilbagh Singh

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt

.....because of the ignorance of the pendency of this case, he failed to associate himself with the crl. misc. not m-38912 o”2. proceedings. this prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent who has stated that the petitioner has been involved in two cases of similar type and therefore, does not deserve the concession of regular bail, more particularly, when he has been declared as a proclaimed offender. having heard the learned counsel for the parties and noticing the contentions that have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court intends to give the benefit of the explanation to the petitioner as such a possibility cannot be ruled out considering that the petitioner was never arrested in this case and thus his ignorance regarding the pendency of the case possibly may be bona fide. consequently, the petition is allowed and the petitioner, dilbagh singh is directed to be released on bail however, subject to his furnishing surety/bail bonds so as to obviate any chance of future default. bail to the satisfaction of the chief judicial magistrate, ferozepur. february 01, 2013 ( mahesh grover ) ritu judge

Full Judgment

Crl.

Misc.

not M-38912 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** Crl.

Misc.

not M-38912 of 2012 Date of decision : February 01, 2013 ***** Dilbagh Singh ............Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...........Respondent ***** CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER ***** Present: Mr.R.S Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Rajni Gupta, Addl.

Advocate General, Punjab.

***** MAHESH GROVER, J (ORAL) This is a prayer for regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.64 dated 23.5.2005 registered under Sections 457/380 IPC at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur.

In the instant FIR, the petitioner was never arrested and therefore, it is his specific case that he was unaware of this FIR.

To establish the bona fides of the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on his behalf has contended that in another FIR bearing No.119 dated 19.12.2005 registered under Sections 379/411/420/467/120-B IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act at a different District, he has been facing prosecution and has been attending the proceedings regularly.

It is further pleaded that because of the ignorance of the pendency of this case, he failed to associate himself with the Crl.

Misc.

not M-38912 o”

2. proceedings.

This prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent who has stated that the petitioner has been involved in two cases of similar type and therefore, does not deserve the concession of regular bail, more particularly, when he has been declared as a proclaimed offender.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and noticing the contentions that have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court intends to give the benefit of the explanation to the petitioner as such a possibility cannot be ruled out considering that the petitioner was never arrested in this case and thus his ignorance regarding the pendency of the case possibly may be bona fide.

Consequently, the petition is allowed and the petitioner, Dilbagh Singh is directed to be released on bail however, subject to his furnishing surety/bail bonds so as to obviate any chance of future default.

Bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur.

February 01, 2013 ( MAHESH GROVER ) ritu JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial