Lovepreet Singh @ Love v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 205-2 CRM-M-25250-2019 Decided on : 15.12.2020 Lovepreet Singh @ Love . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL (Through Video Conferencing) PRESENT: Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab assisted by SI Jagjit Singh.

**** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No. 133, dated 13.08.2018, under Sections 302, 307, 452, 34, 120-B, 201 IPC and Sections 25, 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Islamabad, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 18th August, 2018 and only 02 out of the 46 prosecution witnesses cited so far have been examined till date. Hence, there is no likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future. He further contends that in fact, the false implication of the petitioner is evident from the fact that neither was he named in the FIR in question and even during the investigation by the police, the petitioner was not found present at the place of occurrence and was allegedly standing outside the place of occurrence. Still further, there was no attribution to him with respect to any injury having been inflicted on any of the injured including the deceased.

JAWALA RAM 2020.12.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-25250-2019 - 2 - Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from SI Jagjit Singh, has submitted that the trial in the instant case has been delayed due to the outbreak of pandemic COVID-19. He has also not been able to controvert the submissions made by the opposite counsel with respect to the role attributed to the petitioner in the alleged crime. Heard.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, I deem it a fit case for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioners, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future, more so, in the prevailing conditions due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE December 15, 2020 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2020.12.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh