High CourtsSingle Bench

Makhan Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 6 October 2016 · Citation: (2016) 4 LawHerald 3637

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J.
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M-22460 of 2016 (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

7 paragraphs · 236 words

Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral) - By filing the present petition, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought regular bail in FIR No. 36 dated 23.06.2014, registered under Sections 120-B, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station Mattewal, Amritsar Rural, Tehsil and District Amritsar.

2.

It is contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case on the basis of extra judicial confession of one Jagir Singh son of Bhan Singh. The FIR is based on circumstantial evidence.

3.

The petitioner is in custody since 01.09.2015.

4.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer of bail.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is not named in the FIR; he is in custody since 01.09.2015; out of total 34 PWs, only 02 PWs have been examined so far, therefore, it can be safely inferred that the conclusion of trial will take a long time, without adverting to the merits of the instant case, this petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail during the pendency of trial, on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

7.

Anything said herein above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.