Section 106 IEA Cannot Fill the Gaps in a Shaky Prosecution Case: Rajasthan High Court Rebukes Investigative Lapses in Murder Trial Accident Claim | Ration Card Cannot Decide a Man’s Age: Punjab & Haryana High Court Forgery in Wife’s Name and Defiance of Court Orders Amount to Contempt: Kerala High Court Limitation | Selectively Active Litigant Cannot Seek Liberal Condonation: Delhi High Court Refuses to Revive 1589 Days’ Delay Mere Unnatural Death Within Seven Months Is Not Dowry Death: Delhi High Court Refuses to Reverse Acquittal in Ruby Hanging Case A Partition Suit Is a Suit for Land: Bombay High Court Rejects Plaint for Want of Clause XII Leave Senior Citizens Act Cannot Be A Shortcut To Reclaim Property Registered In Wife's Name: Bombay High Court State Bound By Its Concession; More Meritorious Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment: Supreme Court Balances Equity In Rajasthan Grade III Teacher Recruitment Penalty For Delayed Compensation Is The Employer's Personal Fault — Insurance Company Cannot Be Made To Pay For The Employer's Own Default: Supreme Court Bail Cannot Be a Mechanical Exercise in Murder and Atrocities Cases: Supreme Court Cancels Bail Granted on ‘Extraneous Considerations’ Even A Lathi Becomes A Murder Weapon When Repeatedly Aimed At The Head With Bone-Deep Force: Supreme Court Applies The Virsa Singh Test To Demolish The Defence That Lathis Are Not Deadly Weapons Section 149 IPC While Demanding Proof Of Individual Fatal Blow Runs Contrary To The Very Principle Of Vicarious Liability: Supreme Court Statement Under Section 108 Is Substantive Evidence If Voluntary:  Supreme Court Upholds Conviction In Smuggling Case U.P. Anti-Conversion Act Does Not Apply To Interfaith Live-In Relationships Unless Actual Conversion Is Intended: Allahabad High Court Section 480(6) BNSS | If Trial Is Not Concluded Within Sixty Days… Such Person Shall Be Released On Bail: MP High Court Bombay High Court Lifts Stay on Banks’ Fraud Proceedings Against Anil Ambani Preventive Detention Cannot Survive Without Supplying Relied Upon Documents: Karnataka High Court Reasserts Article 22(5) Safeguards Court Subordinate Who Attended Duty Drunk, Abused Advocates & Misbehaved With Judge's Family Gets No Mercy: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Removal From Service XXXVII Rule 3 CPC | Claim Of 24% Interest Without Prima Facie Contract Cannot Be Blindly Accepted In Summary Proceedings : Madras High Court On Summary Suit Defence Re-Testing Under NDPS Act Cannot Be a Tool to Overcome an Adverse Lab Report: J&K High Court Quashes Charge-Sheet After First Report Ruled Out Heroin Shocking And Disturbing That Cows Died Due To Starvation: Kerala High Court Pulls Up Travancore Devaswom Board Over Neglect Of Temple Gosala Promoter Cannot Retain Ownership By Merely Using The Word ‘Lease’: Bombay High Court Upholds Ownership Deemed Conveyance Under MOFA

Grants Regular Bail in Multi-Case Theft of Oil Operation; "Further Incarceration Not Required," Says Hon'ble Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, granted regular bail to the petitioner, Pawan, in a case involving theft of oil and other related offenses. The judgment was delivered on 14July 2023

The petitioner, represented by Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate, and Mr. Saurav Dogra, Advocate, had sought bail in connection with FIR No.94 dated 25.03.2021, which implicated him under various sections, including the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines Act, Explosive Substances Act, and Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, in the court's ruling, observed that the petitioner had not been named in the original FIR but was later implicated based on disclosure statements made by other arrested accused individuals. The court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since 23.08.2022, and none of the 30 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far.

The court emphasized the need for fair trial procedures and held, "At this stage, the petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2022, investigation stands completed, and none of the 30 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, his further incarceration in the present case is not required."

The ruling further highlighted that the petitioner had been granted bail in two similar cases earlier. The court ordered the release of the petitioner, subject to furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Additionally, the petitioner is required to appear on the first Monday of every month before the police station concerned until the conclusion of the trial and submit an affidavit each time confirming that he is not involved in any other case or crime beyond those mentioned in the order.

Furthermore, the court directed the petitioner to prepare an FDR (Fixed Deposit Receipt) of Rs.2,00,000/- and deposit it with the Trial Court, which may be forfeited if the petitioner fails to appear for trial without sufficient cause.

Date of Decision: 14.07.2023

Pawan  vs State of Haryana   

Latest Legal News