IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-37795 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 07, 2011 Rana Partap Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab. … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for the respondent – State. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Crl. Misc. No. 1761 of 2010 Crl. Misc. application is allowed. Annexures P/3 and P/4 are taken on record.. Crl. Misc. No. M-37795 of 2010 This is an application seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 61 dated 10.04.2010, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar. CRM M-37795 of 2010 Record reveals that there is no eye witness of the occurrence. Petitioner is implicated in the present case on the basis of alleged disclosure statement. Challan has already been submitted. Charges have already been framed. At this stage, there is no chance to tamper with the evidence. Trial may take some time to conclude. Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Kerala vs. Raneef reported in 2011(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 381 has observed as under:- “In deciding bail applications an important factor which should be taken into consideration by Court is the delay in concluding trial. If the accused is denied bail but is ultimately acquitted, who will restore so many years of his life spent in custody.” Moreover, circumstantial evidence is a weak type of evidence. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is allowed. Let, petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. March 07, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2