P&H: Grants Bail In Murder Case Citing that: Every day spent in custody can furnish a new cause of action.

punjab-haryana
⚖️ Order Date: 13 May 2026
Headnotes

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S.483 — Successive bail applications — Accused has a right to move a subsequent bail application and Court must consider whether fresh grounds exist to take a view different from earlier rejection. (Para 5) 

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S.483 — Successive bail applications — Every day spent in custody can furnish a new cause of action and denial of bail must be accompanied by prosecution pressing for early completion of trial. (Para 5)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S.483 — Bail — Prolonged pre-trial incarceration and trial delay not attributable to accused — Law prefers bail over jail and detention prior to trial should not become punitive - An accused cannot be kept in custody indefinitely and bail can...

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S.483, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 307, 148, 149, 160, 323, 324, 212, 216, 120-B, Arms Act, 1959, Ss.25, 27 — Bail — Murder - Case rests on circumstantial evidence with no eye-witness -PW3 and PW4  did not support the prosecution case - Recovery of...

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S.483,  - Successive bail applications - Earlier bail application dismissed on merits — Earlier rejection does not foreclose fresh consideration where circumstances change, including prolonged incarceration and delay in trial. (Para 5)


Facts of the Case

P&H: Grants Bail In Murder Case Citing that: Every day spent in custody can furnish a new cause of action. 

High Court has granted regular bail in murder case, relying on prolonged pre-trial incarceration and delay in concluding the trial. 

Accused is facing trial for offences under IPC Sections 302, 307, 148, 149, 160, 323, 324, 212, 216, 120B and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act,  His earlier bail plea was dismissed. In the fresh petition, he pointed to over two years of custody, a slow-moving trial, absence of an eye-witness, and that key witnesses did not support the prosecution.

The State opposed bail citing serious allegations of firing with co-accused leading to the death of deceased, past antecedents, and risks...

Login required to open full judgment PDF
Login to Access File