UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

High Court Grants Regular Bail Emphasizing Right to Speedy Trial in Murder Case Involving Illicit Relationship

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 Manpreet Kaur, who was accused of murdering her husband, highlighting the fundamental right to a speedy trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The case, bearing FIR No.38 dated 08.04.2021, involved charges under Sections 302/34/328/201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The judgment, delivered by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR on 10.01.2024, addressed the petitioner's prolonged custody and the need for expeditious legal proceedings. Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner, argued that Manpreet Kaur, a mother of a minor child, had been incarcerated since April 8, 2021, severely affecting the welfare of her child.

The court underscored the importance of a speedy trial, stating, "The foundational concept of criminal jurisprudence is to ensure a speedy trial. The right to speedy trial is enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India." The court further explained that this right encompasses all aspects of the legal process, including investigation, trial, appeal, and revision.

The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, but key witnesses, including Manjit Singh, PW-5, did not support the prosecution's claims. Medical reports also contradicted the prosecution's version, as no evidence of sleeping pill ingestion was found. Instead, only ethyl alcohol was discovered in the deceased's body.

Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the court recognized that Manpreet Kaur had been in custody for an extended period, and the trial had not progressed significantly, with only 15 out of 35 prosecution witnesses examined so far. The court concluded that the determination of culpability should occur during the trial.

In its decision, the court granted Manpreet Kaur regular bail, emphasizing that this decision was based on the duration of her custody and should not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case. The court urged the trial court to proceed without being influenced by any observations made during this bail hearing.

Date of Decision: 10.01.2024

Manpreet Kaur VS State of Punjab

 

Latest Legal News