Shamsher Singh @ Shera v. State Of Punjab

    
      
 

!"

"#$%$ & '('( 


 
  

    
  

  
 ) * ( +
 + +        


   !      
 

" #

   + +  , ( -. /0 $ %    
!  &'(" "   !       )*+ ,- $( ./ 0.0.

 
!  '(/ /.1*" 
!  0/!

      ! 
       !  #  !     

 #  !   2earned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 10.07.2020 which is more than three years. He submitted that although the charges were framed in the present case on 23.01.2023, however not even a single prosecution witness has been examined in the present case till date. He submitted that it is a case where the name of the petitioner was nominated on the basis of his  !

  while he was in custody in some other case and in the present case he has been falsely implicated by the police. He submitted

  that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and rather the other similarly situate co-accused, namely, Manraj Singh @ Rubal @ Manmohit Singh @ Man and Rubaljit Singh @ Rubal  3 4   

3!5 6 ! " 

450 5'

! 

   ! !   4! 3 37   7!5!!!7       !

 7 37 !3 8   3 7    3! !!    3    

!  7   4 

     may be considered for the grant of regular bail. 3.

On the other hand,  
 

"  #

  has filed status report and submitted that it is correct that the petitioner has already faced incarceration for more than three years and no prosecution witness has been examined till date. He submitted that in fact one of the other co-accused was absconding and that was the reason as to why the trial has been delayed. So far as the parity of the present petitioner with the other two co-accused who have already been admitted to regular bail is concerned, he has not disputed the same. He submitted that the petitioner is involved in two more cases which are of similar nature.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5.

In the present case the petitioner has already faced incarceration for for more than three years and no prosecution witness has been examined till date. The other co-accused have already been admitted to regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Annexures P-2 and P-3, respectively. As per learned

 counsel for the parties, the name of the petitioner was nominated in the present case while he was in custody in some other case and no recovery has been effected from him. However, without commenting anything on the merit of the case, but considering the long custody of the petitioner which is more than three years and the fact that till date no prosecution witness has been examined, this Court deems it fit and proper to grant bail to the petitioner. " 9  the present petition is allowed. %   

  

  9   ! ! 

  :3 !       ":#3 ! !  87   3

   



4      !  

3  !   

-+ + 0   1/2 ',      ;<

 =:+ ;   =:+