High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18409/2020dismissed

Jagdish Singh @ Disha v. State Of Punjab

2020-08-28Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur2 pages

CRM-M-18409-2020 -1102(2 cases)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (Through Video Conferencing) 1.

CRM-M-18409-2020 Date of Decision:August 28, 2020 Jagdish Singh @ Disha .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent 2.

CRM-M-23215-2020 Jagdish Singh @ Disha ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR

Present:

Mr.Gurpal Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Hittan Nehra, Addl.A.G., Punjab.

........

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This order shall decide both the above mentioned criminal petitions for regular bail, as both the petitions have been filed by the same person in the same FIR.

Prayer in both the petitions filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.103 dated 26.11.2019, under Sections 307, 323, 148, 149 IPC and under Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Lakhewali, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

The first regular bail petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 16.06.2020 passed in CRM-MMEENU 2020.08.28 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CRM-M-18409-2020 -213758-2020. Thereafter CRM-M-18409-2020 was filed by mentioning the same as first regular bail petition instead of mentioning it as second bail petition. The third bail petition, i.e. CRM-M-23215-2020 was filed mentioning it as second petition, whereas it is the third bail petition. On being questioned, learned counsel for the petitioner, who is stated to be the same counsel in all the three bail petitions, stated that the error occurred as he was out of Chandigarh and the same was filed by his Clerk. Even if, the same is stated to be on account of fault of the Clerk, it is not understood as to why the last two bail petitions were filed when one of them was still pending and the first bail petition was dismissed only on 16.06.2020.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw both the bail petitions. Dismissed as withdrawn. However, this Court has stopped itself from imposing heavy costs but not without warning. August 28, 2020 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2020.08.28 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh