Multiple Cases Not A Ground for Bail Denial: Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Extortion and Snatching Case”

Share:
senior bail finger bail public accused 202 Voter Tenant Imagination Constitutional Law landlord 90 rti Punishment jails cheque compromise medical injury station evidence ada motor employee Right Punjab evidence wife penalty Punjab suicide 1 students vamendment la nd 44 fir suit interim consideration evidence property food financialfinancial Gram ginder wife order 202 natural DEMARCATION Property

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted regular bail to Jagsir Singh, also known as Jagga, in a case involving allegations of snatching, extortion, and possession of illegal arms. Justice Pankaj Jain presided over the case numbered CRM-M-56958-2023, emphasizing the court’s stance that “involvement in several more cases cannot be a ground to deny bail.”

Jagsir Singh was arrested in connection with FIR No. 101 dated August 21, 2023, which was filed at the Police Station Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga. The FIR included charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, such as Sections 379-B, 420, 383, 411, 120-B, and the Arms Act Sections 25 and 27.

The court’s decision to grant bail was heavily influenced by the principle of parity, as a co-accused in the case, Sikander Singh alias Sikanderi, had previously been granted bail under similar circumstances. The judgment referenced the case ‘Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of UP and another’, 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 831, and ‘Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of UP (SC)’, (2012) 2 SCC 382, underscoring the notion that an individual’s involvement in multiple cases should not automatically lead to bail denial.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the accusations against Jagsir Singh were dubious, as the victims had delayed their statements for over a month. Moreover, with the investigation concluded and the challan presented, the petitioner’s continued custody was contested.

The State opposed the bail plea, citing the petitioner’s history of involvement in other criminal cases, including three cases under Section 384 IPC and one under Section 307 IPC. However, the court found this argument insufficient to withhold bail.

Justice Pankaj Jain, while granting bail, stipulated that Jagsir Singh must fulfill the bail and surety bond conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or Duty Magistrate concerned. The judge also made it clear that the observations made in the ruling should not be seen as a comment on the merits of the case.

Date of Decision: 20th November 2023

JAGSIR SINGH @ JAGGA VS STATE OF PUNJAB

Download Judgment

Share: