The Punjab and Haryana HC was dealing with the petition filed under Section 439 CrPC for grant of bail.

HC’s observations:

HC looked into various case laws. HC relied upon the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab, where SC held that “the bail decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstances justifying the grant or refusal of bail.”

HC stated that it is true that the gravity of the offence involved is likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice and must weigh when considering the question of jail. So also, the heinousness of the crime.

HC relied upon the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu v Public Prosecutor, where SC held that “the delicate light of the law favors release unless countered by the negative criteria necessitating that course.” HC also relied upon the case of Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh, where SC held “that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously, compassionately, and in a humane manner. Also, conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.”

HC Held:

HC after evaluating case laws and submissions held that “The Co-accused has been already granted bail. Similarly, the other accused was Also given bail. Thus, considering the young age of the petitioner who is of 22 years and at that time he was around 19 years of age, coupled with the period of incarceration already undergone, he makes out a case for bail.”

HC granted bail to the petitioner.

Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara

Case Title: Monu v. State of Haryana

Case Details: CRM-M-47463-2021

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here