Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

High Court Grants Regular Bail to Petitioner in attempt to murder After 6 Months in Custody

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary, granted regular bail to petitioner Ritesh, who had been in custody for more than six months. The decision was made in response to a petition filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) seeking bail in connection with FIR No.914 dated 22.11.2022, registered at Police Station Panipat City, District Panipat.

The counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pawan Kumar Hooda, argued that Ritesh had not been named in the original FIR and was implicated only in the supplementary statement of the complainant, which emerged after 3½ months. Moreover, co-accused Vishal and Robin were granted regular bail by the same court after spending 4 months and 18 days and more than 6 months in custody, respectively.

Justice Aman Chaudhary, while considering the circumstances of the case, noted that the petitioner was not involved in any other case, and none of the 15 witnesses had been examined yet. The trial was expected to be lengthy, making further incarceration of the petitioner unnecessary. In light of these factors, the court found merit in granting the petitioner regular bail.

In the words of Justice Aman Chaudhary, "Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for more than 6 months; not involved in any other case; co-accused have been enlarged on bail; none out of 15 witnesses have yet been examined; the trial is likely to take considerable time and his further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose, thus the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed."

The court imposed several conditions upon Ritesh's release, including not tampering with evidence, not pressurizing or intimidating prosecution witnesses, mandatory appearance before the trial Court, and not committing similar offenses. The petitioner was also directed to furnish his address and mobile number to the Trial Court and seek prior permission before leaving the country.

Date of Decision: 20.07.2023

Ritesh vs State of Haryana

Latest Legal News