Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Considering the Minimal Role of the Petitioner, It Is Appropriate to Grant Anticipatory Bail,” Rules High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Sahil @ Sahil Singh @ Shalu, in a landmark judgment today, concerning his involvement in a fatal group assault incident. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari observed, “Considering the minimal role of the petitioner, it is appropriate to grant anticipatory bail,” emphasizing the limited participation of Sahil in the overall crime scenario.

Sahil was summoned under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to face trial as an additional accused in the case registered under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) concerning a fatal assault. His petition for anticipatory bail was predicated on his alleged minimal involvement in the assault and the argument that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

Background Details: The initial police investigation cleared Sahil of presence at the crime scene. However, subsequent testimonies during the trial led to his summoning as an additional accused, accused primarily of delivering fist blows during the altercation.

Defense’s Arguments: Advocating for Sahil, the defense stressed that he was only marginally involved in the incident, and other more significantly involved accused had already been granted bail.

Opposition by the Prosecution: The State’s counsel resisted the bail application, pointing to the severity of the crime—murder. They argued against granting anticipatory bail due to the case’s gravity.

High Court’s Analysis: Justice Tiwari critically analyzed the contributions of the various accused to the incident and Sahil’s specific actions. Given the petitioner’s previously determined innocence by the police and his comparatively minor role in the assault, the Court found sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail. The ruling stipulates that Sahil must surrender within 15 days for regular bail proceedings, with the provision that failure to comply will lead to revocation of the bail relief.

Judgment Issued:The High Court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, underlining the judiciary’s balanced approach to evaluating each accused’s role in complex criminal cases involving multiple participants.

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024

Sahil @ Sahil Singh @ Shalu vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News