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
2 paragraphs · 157 wordsHarbans Singh, J.
Mr. Hundal points out that the learned designated Court has declined bail to the petitioner on the ground that fire arms were also recovered from his possession at the time of his arrest, although the petitioner has been allowed bail in the Arms Act case. The main grouse of the petitioner is that Manjit Singh, his coaccused has been allowed bail although fire arms were also recovered from him at the time of his arrest. This recovery of the arms from Manjit Singh is not denied by the counsel appearing for the State. In the light of this, there was no ground to decline bail to the petitioner specially when the designated Court has allowed bail to Manjit Singh and the allegations are identical. After considering all the circumstances, I feel that the petitioner is entitled to bail. It is ordered that he be released on bail to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Amritsar.