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.

Piare Lal Vs. the State

Piare Lal vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 22, 1983
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/685888

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
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) Appeal No. 252 of 1983
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

The case dealt with the grant of bail to the accused charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code - The accused enjoyed clean record of service with Central Government - There was no direct evidence of commission of crime - The co-accused was already released on bail - The only eye witness who last saw the vic...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Piare Lal

Advocate K.R. Sud and; S.T. Singh, Advs

Respondent

The State

Legal References

Reported In
24(1983)DLT92

Excerpt

the case dealt with the grant of bail to the accused charged under section 302 of the indian penal code - the accused enjoyed clean record of service with central government - there was no direct evidence of commission of crime - the co-accused was already released on bail - the only eye witness who last saw the victim and the accused together was examined - the court considered the facts of the case and granted bail. - - 5000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.h.l. anand, j.(1) petitioner seeks bail pending trial on a charge of murder. his co-accused which were his wife and a friend who was a police constable are already on bail. the petitioner is said to be a member of the scheduled caste who has a clean record of service in the central government as a section officer. it is stated that there is no direct evidence of the commission of the crime. prosecution strongly relics on the motivation provided by the circumstance that the victim had illicit relations with the daughter of the petitioner and was responsible for disrupting her matrimonial alliance with someone settled abroad. the marriage has since been broken. it is stated that the victim has at one stage been arrested in connection with proceedings pending against him in punjab, where he is alleged to have defrauded a large number of people in conducting a racket for employment abroad. this line of investigation has apparently not been pursued. the petitioner is said to have a serious colic condition. his only ion is posted in a remote place in u.p. and his request for transfer to delhi has not been acceded to. it is further claimed that the only person who claims to have seen the petitioner, the co-accused and the victim last together i.e. mulakh raj was examined as late as.january 3, 1983 while the incident is said to have taken place on december 14, 1982. having regard to all the circumstances, i direct that the petitioner be admitted to bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs. 5000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. dusty.

Full Judgment

H.L. Anand, J.

(1) Petitioner seeks bail pending trial on a charge of murder. His co-accused which were his wife and a friend who was a police constable are already on bail. The petitioner is said to be a member of the Scheduled Caste who has a clean record of service in the Central Government as a Section Officer. It is stated that there is no direct evidence of the commission of the crime. Prosecution strongly relics on the motivation provided by the circumstance that the victim had illicit relations with the daughter of the petitioner and was responsible for disrupting her matrimonial alliance with someone settled abroad. The marriage has since been broken. It is stated that the victim has at one stage been arrested in connection with proceedings pending against him in Punjab, where he is alleged to have defrauded a large number of people in conducting a racket for employment abroad. This line of investigation has apparently not been pursued. The petitioner is said to have a serious colic condition. His only ion is posted in a remote place in U.P. and his request for transfer to Delhi has not been acceded to. It is further claimed that the only person who claims to have seen the petitioner, the co-accused and the victim last together i.e. Mulakh Raj was examined as late as.January 3, 1983 while the incident is said to have taken place on December 14, 1982. Having regard to all the circumstances, I direct that the petitioner be admitted to bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. dusty.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial