Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ramesh Narang @ Meshi vs State Of Punjab on 24 May, 2019

Author: Inderjit Singh

Bench: Inderjit Singh

                                                                     -1-
CRM-M-13203-2019


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

                                   CRM-M-13203-2019 (O & M)
                                   Date of Decision: 24.05.2019

Ramesh Narang @ Meshi
                                                              ... Petitioner
                                  Versus

State of Punjab
                                                             ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:    Mr. Mandeep Singh Sachdev, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

INDERJIT SINGH, J. (Oral)

CRM-9980-2019 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions. CRM-M-13203-2019 Petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.145 dated 01.08.2018, registered at Police Station Division No.4, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar, under Section 307 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

Notice of motion has been issued. Learned State counsel has appeared and contested the instant petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the present petitioner is named 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 23-06-2019 10:34:00 ::: -2- CRM-M-13203-2019 in the FIR and stated to be armed with pistol. He has caused fire-arm injury to Sanjiv Chopra.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that complainant- Gautam Chopra and injured-Sanjeev Chopra have not supported the prosecution version and have turned hostile.

Otherwise also, it is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been suffering from paralytic and has been operated upon.

The petitioner is in custody since 08.02.2018. He is not required for any investigation or interrogation purposes as he is in judicial custody. The trial of case may take a long time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody till the final disposal of the case.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.




24.05.2019                                              (INDERJIT SINGH)
parveen kumar                                                 JUDGE


       Whether speaking/reasoned                 :      Yes
       Whether reportable                        :      No




                                     2 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 23-06-2019 10:34:00 :::