Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

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