High CourtsSingle Bench

Pritpal Singh Alias Laddi vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 4 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 P&H CK 0078

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manjari Nehru Kaul, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 173, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 379B, 395, 482 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 54, 59
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 21723 Of 2020 (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

24 paragraphs · 417 words

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J

CRM No.5421 of 2021

This application has been moved for placing on record the bail order of the petitioner in other FIRs as Annexures P-4 to P-8.

Criminal Misc. Application is allowed and Annexures P-4 to P-8 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CRM-M No.21723 of 2020

The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.233 dated 22.12.2019 registered

under Sections 379-B/34 IPC 1860, under Sections 395, 482 IPC, 1860 and under Sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, 1959 added later on at

Police Station Navi Bhogpur, District Jalandhar Rural, during pendency of the trial.

In compliance of order dated 09.02.2021, status report along with custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed and the same is taken on record

subject to all just exceptions.

Contends that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.01.2020 and only the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C has been presented till date,

hence, there is no likelihood of the trial concluding anytime in the near future. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner has been nominated

as an accused on the basis of an extra judicial confession made by him and the co-accused before one Dara Singh, who is not even a person wielding

any influence in the area much less being in a position of authority. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co-accused have since been

extended the concession of bail vide order dated 22.04.2020.

Per contra, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer of the petitioner, has reiterated the submissions made in the status report with respect to

the allegations against the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner is involved in as many as six other cases of similar nature. However, he has

not been able to controvert the fact that similarly situated co-accused, who have since been extended the concession of bail, were also involved in

other criminal cases.

Heard.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.01.2020 and due to the outbreak of the pandemic Covid-19, the trial is unlikely

to conclude in the near future, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merits

of the case, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate

concerned.