Punjab & Haryana High Court Annual Digest 2022 [Citations 1 - 335]

Citations 1 To 335:1. MCQ Exams- "Question Having No 'Most Appropriate Answer' Is Incapable Of Being Asked, Needs To Be Deleted": P&H High CourtCase title: Lovepreet Singh v. Haryana Public Service Commission and anotherCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 1The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently observed that in a Multiple-Choice Question (MCQ) based examinations, a question which has no single, unique or 'most appropriate answer' (i.e., suspect question) becomes incapable of being asked. It further held that a suspect question in an MCQ based examination needs to be deleted so that no student gets advantage, or is denied advantage, because of evaluation of such questions.2. "Prima Facie Accusation Not True": Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To An Accused In 'Tarn Taran Bomb Blast' CaseCase title: Amarjeet Singh @ Amar Singh v. National Investigation AgencyCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 2The Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted bail to an accused in the 2019 Tarn Taran Bomb Blast case as it recorded that the accusation against him is not prima facie true and therefore, he is entitled to the benefit of regular bail during the pendency of the trial in the case.3. Fixed Deposits Or Electronic Transfers A Bail Condition Likely To Improve Possibility Of Accused's Attendance: Punjab And Haryana High CourtCase Title: Mahidul Sheikh Vs. State of HaryanaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 3The likelihood of an accused to attend the Court will increase if the accused knows that their money is safe and accruing interest and thus, fixed deposits or electronic transfer or creating lien over the bank, instead of cash or sureties as conditions for bail are better mediums to ensure that the accused does not flout Court's Order. A single judge bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided by Justice Anoop Chitkara has further observed that the advancement in technology has obsoleted the identification through sureties and keeping in mind the menace of securing sureties by payment, substituting surety with fixed deposit/bank transfer/lien will also help in addressing the unethical practices taking place through a corrupt system of unscrupulous stock sureties.4. Filing Supplementary Challan Should Not Be Deferred Merely Because Anticipatory Bail Application Is Pending: Punjab & Haryana High CourtCase Title: Sukhwinder Kaur @ Rajvir Kaur v. State of PunjabCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 4The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently held that filing of a supplementary Challan under Section 173 of CrPC cannot be deferred merely because an anticipatory bail application is pending. Such filing should not be deferred for long periods and whenever the same is deferred, specific and genuine reasons must be present for this, it said.5. Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Offence Prima Facie Less Serious Than Co-Accused Who Are On BailCase Title: Sahil v. State of HaryanaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 5If the role attributed to the accused in an offence is prima facie less serious than the role attributed to the co-accused who have been granted the benefit of bail under S.438 CrPC and under S.439 CrPC, and if the accused is a first-time offender, then he deserves an opportunity to course-correct and the opportunity of bail cannot be denied to him. A single-judge bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court presided over by Justice Anoop Chitkara has recently observed that if the accused is a first-time offender and if his co-accused who were similarly placed, have been granted bail, even though the role of co-accused in the offence was more serious than that of the accused, then accused's bail application should be accepted and the accused should be given a chance for grant of bail.6. 'Casteist' Remark: P&H High Court Dismisses Munmun Dutta's Pre Arrest Bail Plea, Allows Her To Approach Sessions CourtCase title - Mun Mun Dutta v. State of HaryanaCitation- 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 6The Punjab and Haryana High Court today dismissed (as withdrawn) the anticipatory bail plea filed by actor Munmun Dutta (best known for her portrayal of Babita Iyer in the popular Hindi serial Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah) over 'Bhangi' remark, a casteist slur, allegedly made by her in a video posted in social media. The was hearing her plea filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in May 2021 FIR (at Hansi) under Section 3(1)(u) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.7. Addl Sessions Judge Treats Regular Bail Plea As Anticipatory Bail Plea: Punjab & Haryana High Court Calls It 'Serious' IssueCase title - Sukhchain Singh @ Chaini v. State of Punjab CaseCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 7The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently called into question a bail order passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Faridkot, treating a regular bail petition as an anticipatory bail petition, even when the accused had been in the custody at the time of filing the bail plea. Calling it a matter of 'serious...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Annual Digest 2022 [Citations 1 - 335]

Drishti Yadav

Tags