CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Makhan Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 10 January 2011 · Citation: (2011) 01 P&H CK 0141

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 120B, 302, 34 · Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 16(1)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-32870 of 2010 (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

7 paragraphs · 197 words

Alok Singh, J.—This is the petition u/s 439 Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 61 dated 28.7.2009 under Sections 302/34/120B IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and 16(1) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, P.S. Sadar Mansa.

2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has vehemently argued that the Petitioner''s role is similar that of other accused Gurbir Singh and Gurdeep Singh alias Raju, who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated September Crl. Misc. No. M-32870 of 2010 -2 21st, 2010.

3.

Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab has handed over an affidavit, sworn by Mr. Tarsem Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Head Quarter Mansa, which is taken on record.

4.

Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mansa has stated that the Petitioner was challaned earlier also in eight different criminal cases.

5.

Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab has argued that since the Petitioner has the criminal history, hence there is every likelihood of winning over the witnesses and tampering the evidence.

6.

Considering totallity of the facts and circumtances of the present case, I do not incline to grant bail to the Petitioner.

Petition dismissed.