-
by Admin
15 February 2026 5:35 AM
Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Beant Singh v. State of Punjab, granted regular bail to the petitioner, Beant Singh, who was arrested for allegedly possessing stolen mobile phones. Justice Sandeep Moudgil emphasized that Beant Singh had been in custody for over four months and the trial had yet to commence, making prolonged detention unnecessary. The Court also noted that no further recovery was pending, and the delay in trial justified the grant of bail.
Beant Singh was arrested on May 16, 2024, under Section 411 of the IPC for possessing a stolen mobile phone. The case was later expanded to include charges under Section 379-B of the IPC and the Arms Act. Despite the investigation being completed and the chargesheet filed on July 15, 2024, the trial had not progressed, and no charges had been framed. The petitioner sought regular bail, claiming false implication and delay in trial.
The primary issue was whether the petitioner, who had been in custody for over four months without charges being framed, should be granted bail. The Court also considered the petitioner's criminal history and the number of pending cases against him.
Justice Moudgil highlighted that while the petitioner had prior criminal cases, bail should not be denied solely based on pending cases. The Court referred to the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, noting that prolonged pre-trial incarceration should be avoided unless necessary.
"A fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, and prolonged custody without trial violates the right to a speedy trial."
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted Beant Singh regular bail, directing him to furnish the necessary bonds. The Court reiterated that the petitioner's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution could not be compromised due to delays in the judicial process.
Date of Decision: September 25, 2024
Beant Singh v. State of Punjab.
