CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Brij Mohan vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 21 February 2011 · Citation: (2011) 02 P&H CK 0068

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajan Gupta, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 392, 404, 460
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. M 3385 of 2011 (O and M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 200 words

Rajan Gupta, J.—This is a petition u/s 439 Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail in a case registered against the Petitioner under Sections 460, 404 and 392 IPC at Police Station City Batala, District Gurdaspur, vide FIR No. 17 dated 2nd February, 2010.

2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He is, thus, entitled to the concession of bail.

3.

I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case.

4.

The complaint was lodged by one Kewal Krishan, serving as Sub Inspector in Wireless Department of the Police. He stated that he was married to Usha Rani alias Rama in the year 1975. On 2nd February, 2010, he received information that three persons were lying dead in the residential house of his father-in-law. The complainant along with his wife reached the spot. It was found that father-in-law of the complainant and two other relatives had been brutally murdered. Name of the Petitioner figured during investigation. In my considered view, the Petitioner, namely Brij Mohan is not entitled to concession of bail. The petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.