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
16 paragraphs · 293 wordsHarnaresh Singh Gill, J
Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 133 dated 05.7.2020 under Sections 307, 506, 148, 149 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and
later on added Sections 188 IPC and Section 54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Mohkampura, District Amritsar.
Custody certificate by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent, Central Jail, Amritsar has been filed through e-mail. Copy of the same is taken on
record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and he was neither present at the spot nor any injury has
been attributed to him. He further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.8.2020.
On the other hand, learned State counsel points out that one datar has been recovered from the petitioner and the weapon used by Vishwas, was
alleged to be supplied by the petitioner.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel.
In the present case, neither the petitioner has been named in the FIR nor any injury has been attributed to him and he was not found present at the
spot. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 04 months and there is no other case pending against him. The trial
will take time to conclude because of Covid-19 pandemic. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.
Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing
bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.