Gursewak Singh v. State Of Punjab
!"#"
$%&'
(' )*+)
,'
"
"
$ - .
-#/# ) '''' #0 $ $
1% 231)')
3
!!!!
34'536 "
# $ $ %& (%() * $
+ , * * $
,
, * *$ "-&.'/0 * 1 $ 2 2 (%(' 3# 1 "&& %) %4 (%(5 (" 0(" +(& (4)"-516$
+ 6 +
(
7 *%) %4 (%(5
"-% * ,, 8%9 (%() : 2$8
(& (%()$ +
;8 <
"-&.'/ 01 (%('
%& (%(),, *
+$ 8
,
* *,
8* *"-% * 8'% *,
$
'
7 $ 3# ,
8* *"-% *
, * + 8 $ , * "-% $ "-&.'/01
+ $ : *
,
7 $
$
* : $ 2$8
+(& (%() ,
8* "-% * , 8*"-% *
+ $ *$ 8
* *
+, * : *
: 2
)
*3#
2$8
7
+ (& (%() ,
8* *"-% * <
+ $ 8
%& (%() 8*"-% * < *+ , $ *
* *+$ *+ ,$ ,
< ,$ <:= 6 0:$+
,
, *2$8
8*"-% 8, $ ")&.'/+ + >"-&.'/01(%('
< $ , "Be that as it may, in view of the fact that (i) the Additional Public Prosecutor was competent to apply for extension of time; (ii) such an application was moved before expiry of one hundred and eighty days' period; (iii) the extension was sought before the petitioner applied for his bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and (iv) the fact that no charge)sheet could be filed for want of FSL report as it would have led to rejection of the charge)sheet itself, we are of the considered view that the petitioner (Varinder Sandhu) is not entitled to the benefit of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. His revision petition is accordingly dismissed. This order shall, however, cause no
8 prejudice to the petitioner's prayer for bail on merits, if he applies for the same."
& #, $
*$ +,
2$8
* , 8*"-% ,
$ = $
$
* # $* $
8
8*"-% * <
+$ 8*"-% *?, , < 2 $ $
* * + , $
*+,$ %& (%()
-
* $ * *
:,
* * *
5
36 "- %5 (%() / @ 2$> A
>1 / @
A
>1