RAJ KAUR ALIAS JEET KAUR Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.8.2001. During the course of trial, the petitioner got ill and could not present here self before the trial Court on a date when the evidence had to be recorded. Petitioner was ill and photostat copies of all the certificates issued by the Doctor, Civil Hospital, Zira were placed before the trial Court.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the State has stated that the recovery from the petitioner and her co-accused is a commercial quantity and concession of bail should not be granted.

(3.) I do not agree with the sweeping observations made by the trial Court. The Court should have first summoned the Doctor and verified the correctness and truthfulness of the certificates issued by the Doctor. The certificates are from Civil Hospital, Zira and not from a private practitioner.