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 Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

“Further Incarceration Not Required”: Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Regular Bail to Accused in Alleged Anti-National Activities Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant order , the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Sumit Kumar, who was accused of anti-national activities and possession of weapons. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi presided over the case and laid out the judgement.

The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, was accused under various sections of the IPC, Arms Act, and Explosive Substances Act. He was in custody since July 28, 2022, and was seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C).

The Court observed, “The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the trial.” The judgement further noted that “Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 28.07.2022 and none of the 14 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.” Justice Bedi concluded that “the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required,” which set the tone for the final decision.

While the defense argued that there was no concrete evidence against Sumit Kumar, the State contended that he was part of a larger gang involved in anti-national activities. Nonetheless, the Court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to terms and conditions. One of these conditions requires Kumar to appear before the police station on the first Monday of every month until the trial concludes.

The Court also imposed financial conditions, instructing Kumar to prepare an FDR of Rs. 1,00,000, to be deposited with the Trial Court. The petitioner was further instructed to deposit his passport with the Trial Court immediately if he had not already done so.

The judgement has not referred to any previous cases, and it explicitly states that the granting of bail does not comment on the merits of the case. The petition stands disposed of, with the petitioner granted bail under the specified conditions.

No other cases were referred to in the judgement, and the petition has been disposed of with the grant of bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions.

Date of Decision: September 01, 2023

Sumit Kumar vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News