'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Anticipatory Bail Granted to Former Deputy C.M. Sukhbir Badal Unprovoked Firing Conspiracy Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, has granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a case involving an alleged conspiracy related to unprovoked firing upon peaceful protesters.

The judgment, pronounced on September 29, 2023, addresses a series of petitions (CRM-M-14308, 14326, 14915, 14921, 14926, and 16991 of 2023) with similar facts and a common prayer. It marks a crucial turning point in a case where the petitioners had previously faced dismissal of their bail applications.

The case had its roots in a religious congregation held in 2007, which sparked controversy. The FIR filed in the aftermath of the incident led to subsequent developments, including sacrilege incidents and growing resentment among Sikh communities.

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) conducting the investigation implicated several individuals, including the petitioners. The judgment outlined the specific actions attributed to each accused, based on the SIT’s findings.

Justice Chitkara’s judgment highlighted the pivotal factors leading to the grant of anticipatory bail. He emphasized the lack of a need for custodial interrogation, the magnitude of the crime, and the quality of evidence collected.

“In the present case, the magnitude of the crime was undoubtedly massive; still, the evidence collected against the petitioners is based on presumptions that the petitioners were involved in the conspiracy, and the evidence prima facie lacks evidence qua motive,” the judgment noted.

Furthermore, the judgment made it clear that the petitioners would not influence or tamper with witnesses or the investigation. It outlined conditions for the grant of anticipatory bail, which were to be strictly followed.

The judgment cited legal precedents, including cases such as Mahdoom Bava v. Central Bureau of Investigation, Sidharth v. State of UP, and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI, in support of its decision.

This judgment stands as a significant development in the ongoing legal proceedings, allowing the petitioners relief in the form of anticipatory bail while awaiting further trial.

DATE OF DECISION: September 29, 2023

Sukhbir Singh Badal   Vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News