High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Rabbi Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 November 2017 · Citation: (2017) 11 P&H CK 0043

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-319>Section 319</a> - Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-302>Section 302</a> - Punishme
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
35668-2017 (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

29 paragraphs · 325 words
1.

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the

petitioner in FIR No.215 dated 23.11.2016 under Section 302 IPC and

Sections 27 / 54 / 59 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sadar Khanna,

District Ludhiana.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the eyewitness

in this case namely Surmukh Singh has already been examined and has not

supported the prosecution version. It is further submitted that another

witness, son of deceased namely Narinderpal Singh, who has got FIR

registered, is not coming forward for the last more than 3-4 dates for

conclusion of his cross-examination. Counsel for the petitioner has further

submitted that after recording the examination-in-chief of the petitioner, an

application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved to summon one Inderjeet

Singh as additional accused, however, the same was dismissed and on that

account, trial is delayed. It is also submitted that as per the version given in

the FIR, it was only an accidental case, where the gunshot was fired in the

air during the marriage ceremony. Counsel for the petitioner further submits

that the petitioner is about 60 years of age and he is in judicial custody since

23.11.2016 and is not involved in any other case.

3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Jagjeevan

Ram, has submitted that there are 20 witnesses, out of which 05 have been

examined. Learned counsel for the complainant has however opposed the

prayer for regular bail.

4.

Without commenting on merits of the case, considering the fact

that the petitioner is aged about 60 years, not involved in any other FIR and

is in judicial custody since 23.11.2016 and also in view of the fact that

conclusion of trial will take long time, as 15 witnesses are yet to be

examined, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his

furnishing bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of trial Court.

5.

Petition is disposed of.