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 is the Rule and Jail is an Exception - Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail in Illegal Mining Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a significant ruling, reiterated the principle that "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception", while granting regular bail to the petitioner, Nasib Chand, in an illegal mining case under various sections of IPC and the Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957.

The Court's decision focused on the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence, emphasizing the right to bail as a default, rather than detention.

The petitioner, Nasib Chand, was implicated in FIR No.159 dated 17.10.2023, for allegedly conducting illegal mining activities near Shri Ram Crusher, village Bhalrri. Despite being granted bail in three other similar cases, the Sessions Judge had declined bail in this particular case, prompting the current petition.

Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, while delivering the judgement, cited landmark cases such as "State of Rajasthan V. Balchand", "Nikesh Tarachand Shah V. Union of India", and "Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra". The Court underscored the importance of the right to a speedy trial, presumption of innocence, and the fact that incarceration should not be used as a punitive measure pre-trial.

The judgement reinforced the legal principles surrounding bail, rooted in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty. The Court held that unless the presence of the accused cannot be ensured otherwise, detention is not mandatory.

Granting bail, the Court ordered the petitioner's release subject to the furnishing of a bail bond and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned judicial authority. The Court also clarified that its observations were solely for the present petition and should not influence the trial's merits.

Date of Decision: January 29, 2024

Nasib Chand Vs. State of Punjab

 

Latest Legal News