Skip to content


Simranjit Singh @simra and Others Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Simranjit Singh @simra and Others

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt:


.....this case. it is further submitted that medical officer has not opined any injury to be dangerous to life and only injury no.1 was declared as grievous. it is further submitted that though investigation completed and challan filed and however, no witness has been examined so far and hence, trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. this factual position has not been disputed by learned counsel for the state. there are no allegations on behalf of the state that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the court, if released on bail. hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant application for regular bail filed on behalf of simranjit singh @simra, karamjit singh @kala, harpreet singh @happy, gurkirat singh @kirat and parwinder singh @binda is allowed. bail to the satisfaction of cjm/duty magistrate, ropar. ( ram chand gupta ) march 22, 2013. judge ‘om’

Judgment:


CRM not M-3453 o”

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

Misc.

not M- 3453 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: March 22, 2013.

Simranjit Singh @SiMr.and others .....PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab .....RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Deepak Garg, AAG, Punjab.

***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.148 dated 15.09.2012, under Sections 307/325/148/149/506/120B IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, registered at police station Morinda, District Roopnagar.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar dismissing bail application filed on behalf of the petitioneRs.CRM not M-3453 o”

2. It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioners-accused that they have been continuing in custody since 10.11.2012.

It is further contended that there is only one injured and that as per medical evidence, five injuries were found on his person however, eight persons have been implicated in this case.

It is further submitted that medical officer has not opined any injury to be dangerous to life and only injury no.1 was declared as grievous.

It is further submitted that though investigation completed and challan filed and however, no witness has been examined so far and hence, trial is not likely to be concluded in near future.

This factual position has not been disputed by learned counsel for the State.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant application for regular bail filed on behalf of Simranjit Singh @Simra, Karamjit Singh @Kala, Harpreet Singh @Happy, Gurkirat Singh @Kirat and Parwinder Singh @Binda is allowed.

Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Ropar.

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) March 22, 2013.

JUDGE ‘om’


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //