High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Jugraj Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 4 August 2017 · Citation: (2017) 08 P&H CK 0017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Inderjit Singh
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-439>Section 439</a> - Special powers of High Court or Court of Session regarding bail · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-302>Section 302</a>, <a href=1767-307>S
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
M-14250 of 2017 (O&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

27 paragraphs · 316 words
1.

Petitioner-Jugraj Singh, has filed this petition under Section

439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in

case FIR No.4 dated 19.01.2016, registered at Police Station Beas, District

Amritsar, under Sections 302, 307, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code

and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959.

2.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared

and contested the instant petition.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned State counsel and gone through the record.

4.

From the record, I find that as per allegations two persons

armed with pistol came on motorcycle. The pillion rider of the said

motorcycle, caught hold the brother of the complainant namely Gurpreet

Singh alias Kaka and fired a shot from his pistol on his brother, which hit on

his right side of neck. It is further stated that the brother of the complainant caught hold the assailant and during scuffle, accidently pistol released the

fire shot hitting on the left side of back of that person. The other person

namely Mani, to whom the complainant was already knowing, also fired a

shot from his pistol which hit on the left thigh of the assailant. As per the

allegations, the petitioner has been named by the co-accused and lalkara has

been attributed to him.

5.

Moreover, the charges have not been framed yet and the case is

at preliminary stage. Therefore, there is every change of tempering with the

evidence, if the petitioner is released on bail.

6.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present

case, nature and gravity of the offence and the stage of the case, I do not

find it a fit case where the petitioner is entitled to benefit of regular bail.

7.

Therefore, finding no merit in the instant petition, the same is

dismissed at this stage.