Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.38 seconds)
Documents citing Harpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 22 May, 2019

Jaspal Singh@Happy vs State Of Punjab on 3 August, 2022

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that undisputedly the petitioner was not in the truck when the contraband was recovered and the case of the prosecution is that he had disembarked from the truck earlier in point of time before the interception was done. He contends that the petitioner cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband which was recovered from the said co-accused. It is further contended that the said co-accused 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 04-08-2022 18:17:17 ::: CRM-M-45248-2021 - 3- Harpreet Singh from whom the recovery had been effected has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 16.03.2018 passed in CRM-M-8323 of 2018 titled "Harpreet Singh versus State of Punjab". He further contends that the petitioner has already undergone custody of 10 months and 12 days.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chanan Singh vs State Of Punjab on 14 March, 2024

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act are admittedly not complied with and non-adherence to the safeguard provided under the Act would vitiate the entire trial and it would amount to violation of Article 21 which ensures free and fair investigation. The contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is marginally higher than the commercial quantity and petitioner has undergone a custody of more than 01 year and 09 months. The challan was presented way back on 03.06.2020, charges were framed on 04.08.2020 and the prosecution has failed to conclude its evidence. He further placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in CRM-M-349-2021 titled as 'Harpreet Singh Vs. State of Punjab' decided on 01.07.2021.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Harpreet Singh vs Union Of India And Ors on 4 February, 2025

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for grant of 08 weeks parole under Section 3(1)(d) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (as amended upto date) and in view of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No.2084 of 2023 titled as Harpreet Singh vs. State of Punjab vide Annexure P-1.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R Bhardwaj - Full Document

Vishvajit vs State Of Punjab on 1 September, 2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said FIR. It is argued that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner and allegations are general in nature. It is also argued that the material witnesses have been examined and the prosecutrix has not supported the version of the prosecution. In fact she has turned hostile. It is further argued that co-accused have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 09.08.2021 titled as Ritik Vs. State of Punjab passed in CRM-M No.11938 of 2021 and vide 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2021 23:42:46 ::: CRM-M No.1004 of 2021 (O&M) -2- order dated 26.08.2021 passed in CRM-M No.11000 of 2021 titled as Harpreet Singh Vs. State of Punjab. The trial is likely to take some time to conclude and therefore, prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - J Thakur - Full Document

Nitish Bhardwaj vs State Of Haryana on 2 June, 2022

He has submitted that he duly filed application before the trial Court for granting the NOC, however, the same was declined by the learned Court by virtue of passing the impugned order dated 22nd April, 2022. He has submitted that the petitioner at this stage, does not require renewal of passport for travelling abroad. However, the same is required for appearing in the concerned exam which would be held in India itself and the requirement of the renewed passport is one of the essential conditions. He has relied upon the judgments of this Court titled as Harpreet Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2010(9) RCR (Criminal) 498 and Harvinder Singh Bajwa Vs. Union of India and others, 2021(1) RCR(Civil) 103 and hence, prayed for setting aside the same and directing the passport authorities for renewal of his passport.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R Bhardwaj - Full Document
1   2 Next