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 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