High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohan @ Mohan Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 P&H CK 0069

HON’BLE JUDGES
Hari Pal Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302, 341
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 27733 Of 2020
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

20 paragraphs · 361 words

Hari Pal Verma, J

The matter has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing due to outbreak of COVID-19.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.61 dated 08.07.2019

registered under Sections 302, 341, 34 of IPC at Police Station Sadar Zira, District Ferozepur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for more than 4 months. The petitioner has earlier approached this Court for

grant of anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed as withdrawn, however, with direction to the trial Court to decide the application filed by the

petitioner seeking regular bail within a period of 10 days vide order dated 20.07.2020 passed in CRM-M-11818-2020. The petitioner was working in

the Cooperative Society and he was found innocent during investigation, though challan was presented by the police Inspector on 18.07.2019 against

the other co-accused Sonu and Sukha.

Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate, which is taken on record. He does not dispute the custody and the fact that the petitioner was

found innocent. However, he submits that the trial Court has summoned the petitioner as an additional accused. Even otherwise he was mentioned as

an accused in the initial version on the basis of which FIR was recorded.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

There is no dispute that during investigation, initially the petitioner was found innocent and it is on the basis of the statement made by the complainant,

the petitioner has been summoned as an additional accused to face trial. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than 4 months

and trial in the case will take long time, this Court deems it appropriate to admit the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

The observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial court shall decide the case on the

basis of available material.