Harwinder Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, 447, 511
Judgment
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Shri A.K. Walia, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri N.S. Gill, AAG, Punjab. **** The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 393 dated 30.6.2006 under Sections 307,326,324,323,447,511,148 and 149 IPC and Section 25/27/54/59 of the Amrs Act, registered at the Police Station, Sadar, Patiala. The petitioners are in custody since 2.7.2006. As per prosecution version, petitioner No.1 is alleged to have caused injuries on the little finger of the complainant, which falls under Section 326 IPC and petitioner No.2 Amrik Singh has been attributed injuries, which falls under Section 324 IPC. In this case, challan has been filed and charges are yet to be framed. Trial is not going to conclude soon. In view of the aforesaid facts and keeping in view the custody period, I deem it appropriate to grant regular bail to the petitioners and they are accordingly ordered to be released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court. October 31, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, 447, 511.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 31 Oct 2006. The bench was SATISH KUMAR MITTAL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.