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 7, Cited by 6]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Satnam Ram @ Sattu vs State Of Punjab on 10 August, 2017

Author: Inderjit Singh

Bench: Inderjit Singh

                                                                     -1-
CRM-M-23614-2017


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

                                   CRM-M-23614-2017
                                   Date of Decision: 10.08.2017

Satnam Ram @ Sattu

                                                              ... Petitioner
                                  Versus

State of Punjab

                                                             ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH


Present:    Mr. Manuj Nagrath, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Sr.DAG, Punjab.

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner-Satnam Ram @ Sattu has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.30 dated 23.03.2017, registered at Police Station Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana, under Sections 323, 325, 326, 427, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

Notice of motion has been issued. Learned State counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent-State 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 has been stated to be armed with kirpan and caused injury to Mohan on his right 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 17:34:40 ::: -2- CRM-M-23614-2017 hand and also caused injuries to Gurpreet Singh on the back side of his head and left wrist. The injury on the back side of head of Gurpreet Singh falls under Section 325 IPC.

The petitioner has been in custody since 19.05.2017. He is not required for any investigation or interrogation purposes as he is in judicial custody. The trial of the case will take long time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody till the final disposal of the case. Moreover, all the offences are triable by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class.

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 `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.




10.08.2017                                              (INDERJIT SINGH)
parveen kumar                                                 JUDGE



       Whether speaking/reasoned                 :      Yes
       Whether reportable                        :      No




                                     2 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 17:34:41 :::