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 to Accused in RPG Attack on Mohali Case – Not Named In FIR: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to two accused individuals, Manpreet Singh alias Patwari and Gurjinder Singh alias Gurinder Singh alias Baba, in a case related to the RPG attack on Mohali. The decision comes after a detailed examination of the evidence and circumstances surrounding the case.

The RPG attack on Mohali had garnered widespread attention due to the seriousness of the charges. The accused were facing charges under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, they were accused of violating Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

One of the notable aspects of the judgment was the court's consideration of the accused's role in the incident. The court emphasized that the petitioners, Manpreet Singh and Gurjinder Singh, were not named in the First Information Report (FIR) and were not apprehended at the scene of the incident. Moreover, there was no recovery of firearms or narcotics from these individuals. The court found that there was no concrete evidence linking them to the alleged attack.

In its decision, the court also highlighted that the incident appeared to have occurred spontaneously, without prior conspiracy or common intention on the part of the accused. The judgment cited the absence of injuries inflicted on any person, particularly the police officials, as a key factor.

Furthermore, the court took into account the prolonged period of custody for both petitioners. Manpreet Singh had been in custody since May 25, 2022, while Gurjinder Singh had been incarcerated since June 6, 2022. With 37 prosecution witnesses yet to be examined and all of them being official witnesses, the court concluded that the petitioners were not likely to influence the witnesses or hinder the trial.

The court's decision was also influenced by the absence of any prior criminal convictions or ongoing cases against the accused individuals. Citing the Supreme Court's judgment in "Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another," the court underscored the need to consider the facts and circumstances of each case when deciding bail applications.

High Court court granted bail to Manpreet Singh alias Patwari and Gurjinder Singh alias Gurinder Singh alias Baba, subject to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court and the condition that they do not engage in any criminal activity or attempt to influence witnesses in the future.

The judgment underscores the principle that bail decisions should be based on a careful examination of the evidence and circumstances of each case, and that the accused's role should be a crucial factor in determining their eligibility for bail.

Date of Decision: 25 September 2023

Sukhchain Singh alias Bhujia  vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News