At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

Non-Lethal Weapons No Ground for Bail: P&H HC High Denies Bail in Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin

In a significant Bail Order, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana denied the bail application of Sudesh Singh, involved in a serious criminal case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 302. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi dismissed the bail plea in the case CRM-M-57528-2023.

The case, registered under FIR No. 103 dated May 3, 2022, at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar, Punjab, includes charges under IPC Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 148, 149 (related to unlawful assembly), and others. The petitioner, Sudesh Singh, argued false implication and absence from the scene of the crime.

In his decision, Justice Sethi emphasized, "The individual role of the accused is not required to be considered when they are alleged to have been part of the unlawful assembly." This reference to a Supreme Court judgment, 'Kumer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan,' underscored a pivotal legal point about the role of non-lethal weapons in such cases.

The court observed that merely being armed with non-lethal weapons does not justify bail, especially in cases involving charges as serious as Section 302 IPC. This statement sheds light on the court's stringent approach towards cases involving collective criminal actions.

The State, opposing the bail, cited the gravity of the allegations and the collective intention of the unlawful assembly. The evidence, including statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C., was thoroughly examined before reaching the decision. The court found the petitioner's claim of false implication unsubstantiated and highlighted the severity of the alleged crimes, including the use of sharp-edged weapons leading to serious injuries and a fatality.

This judgment sets a precedent, reinforcing the legal principle that participation in an unlawful assembly with serious allegations overshadows the non-lethal nature of weapons possessed by the individuals. The decision signals a tough stance by the judiciary on crimes involving collective criminal intent, especially in cases of serious offenses like murder.

Date of Decision: 21.11.2023

SUDESH SINGH VS STATE OF PUNJAB

Latest Legal News

  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 9:22 AM
138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court
  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 7:43 AM
Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court
  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 7:43 AM
High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused
  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 7:43 AM
If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court
  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 7:42 AM
Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO
  • by sayum
    10 January 2026 7:42 AM
Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court