NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols

Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a recent judgment, reaffirmed the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence, stating, “Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception.” The judgment, delivered by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI on December 2, 2023, granted regular bail to the petitioner in a cross-case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The case, registered under Sections 452, 326, 323, 325, 427, 506, 148, and 149 IPC, stemmed from a dispute that took place on January 13, 2023. The petitioner, SURJEET SINGH @ GOLA, sought bail after being in custody for over six months.

In the judgment, the Court emphasized the importance of balancing individual liberty and society’s interests when granting or refusing bail. It stated, “The society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail because every criminal offence is the offence against the State. The order granting or refusing bail must reflect a perfect balance between the conflicting interests, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and the interest of the society.”

The Court also took into account the delay in framing charges, the trivial nature of the incident, and the fact that all other co-accused except the petitioner had been granted bail. The judgment highlighted the need for a fair and balanced approach in bail decisions.

As a result of the judgment, SURJEET SINGH @ GOLA was granted regular bail with certain conditions. He is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

The Court, while allowing bail, cautioned against future commission of similar offenses by the petitioner. It clarified that its observations in the judgment have no impact on the merits of the trial and are meant for deciding the bail application only.

Date of Decision: December 02, 2023

SURJEET SINGH @ GOLA VS STATE OF PUNJAB

Latest Legal News