Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Bail In Murder Cases - Lack Of Specific Allegations Against The Petitioner In The FIR : Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to Mohd. Rafiq in case FIR No. 122, under Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the IPC, highlighting the principle that "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception." This landmark decision was delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari on January 25, 2024.

The case, registered at Police Station Jodhewal, District Ludhiana, revolved around the death of Nazo Khatoon, with the petitioner being accused of involvement in the alleged murder. However, Justice Tiwari noted the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the case's reliance on circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession.

In his observations, Justice Tiwari cited the landmark judgment "State of Rajasthan V. Balchand alias Baliay", emphasizing the fundamental right enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which upholds the principle of personal liberty. "The underlying objective behind detention of a person is to ensure easy availability of an accused for trial, without any inconvenience, however, in case the presence of an accused can be secured otherwise, then detention is not compulsory," Justice Tiwari remarked.

The court also took into account the petitioner's incarceration of over 3 years, considering it significant while granting bail. The court observed, "The right to a speedy trial is one of the rights of a detained person. However, while deciding application for regular bail, the Courts shall also take into consideration the fundamental precept of criminal jurisprudence, which is 'the presumption of innocence', besides the gravity of offence(s) involved."

While allowing the bail, the Court clarified that this should not be construed as a comment on the merits of the case and that if the petitioner were found indulging in similar offenses in the future, the State could seek cancellation of the bail.

Date of Decision: 25 January 2024

MOHD. RAFIQ VS STATE OF PUNJAB

 

Latest Legal News