Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case, Citing Lack of Eyewitnesses and Pandemic-Related Absence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has granted regular bail to Nand Kishore Sahni, the petitioner, who was facing charges under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision, rendered by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN on October 16, 2023, has garnered attention for its observations on the lack of eyewitnesses and the petitioner's absence due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The case, registered as FIR No. 0112 on April 15, 2019, stemmed from a complaint filed by Munna Singh, the brother of the deceased Muntun Singh. Munna Singh alleged that the petitioner and others had assaulted his brother, leading to his tragic demise. However, the complainant's statement was primarily based on hearsay, and there were no eyewitnesses to the incident.

The petitioner had been in custody since January 16, 2023, and the material witness, Munna Singh, had already been examined during the proceedings. The petitioner's absence from the trial was attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a balanced decision, Justice Pankaj Jain commented, "Without commenting on the merits of the case, keeping in view the incarceration already suffered by the petitioner, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned."

This judgment highlights the importance of a fair legal process and the consideration of unique circumstances, such as the pandemic, in determining bail applications. It serves as a reminder that the absence of eyewitnesses and hearsay evidence must be carefully evaluated in such cases.

Nand Kishore Sahni's counsel, Mr. Arun Chander Sharma, welcomed the decision, while the State of Haryana, represented by Mr. A.K. Sehrawat, did not dispute the factual assertions made by the petitioner's counsel. Shri Viney Sharma, Advocate, acted as counsel for the accused persons.

This ruling sets a precedent for cases where the absence of eyewitnesses and pandemic-related circumstances play a crucial role in the bail application process, emphasizing the need for a fair and just legal system.

Date of Decision: October 16, 2023

NAND KISHORE SAHNI  vs STATE OF HARYANA

Latest Legal News