Kamaljit Verma v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta1on Sec1ons 46 25.06.2024 Aur, District SBS 398, 452, 120-B IPC and 25 of Arms Act Nagar, Punjab

¶1The pe!!oner apprehending arrest in the FIR cap!oned above has come up before this Court under Sec!on 482 of Bhara!ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking an!cipatory bail.

¶2In paragraph 8 of the bail pe!!on and as per paragraph 8 of the status report, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR Dated Offenses Police Sta1on No.

¶1233 29.10.2021 25 of Arms Act City Nawanshahar, Dis<. SBS Nagar

¶276 15.10.2021 379 IPC Behram, Dis<. SBS Nagar

¶3112 12.12.2023 21 of NDPS Act Sadar Banga, SBS Nagar

¶437 30.06.2024 22 of NDPS Act Mukandpur, Dis<. SBS Nagar

¶3The facts and allega!ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: "2. xxx xxx complainant-Pardip Kumar Raju son of Kewal Krishan, resident of village Musapur, Police Sta!on Sadar Nawanshahar, District SBS Nagar, met the Inves!ga!on Officer and got recorded his statement averring therein that he was running an agency of Western Union Money Transfer at village Sahlon for the last 13 years. It was further averred by the order/judgment. 1 complainant-Pardip Kumar Raju that on 25.06.2024 at about 04:00 PM, he was present in his office along with Gurbax Ram son of Darshan Ram, who was running a grocery shop adjoining to his office and in the meanwhile three persons, who had muffled their faces, entered his office and out of them a6empted to come near to him a7er scaling the glass counter and second persons started firing from firearm and third person bolted the door from inside. It was further averred by the complainant-Pardip Kumar Raju that he switched on the hooter installed in the office and the aforemen!oned robbers fled away from the spot on motorcycle along with their firearms and he immediately made phone call to the police and complainant-Pardip Kumar Raju requested to take ac!on against the unknown robbers in accordance with law."

¶4The pe!!oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi!ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera!on would cause an irreversible injus!ce to the pe!!oner and his family.

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶6It would be appropriate to refer to the following por!ons of the status report, which read as follows: "8. xxxx xxxx ROLE OF THE PETITIONER From thorough inves!ga!on carried out in the present case, it was transpired that en!re conspiracy to rob the complainant-Pardip Kumar Raju had been chalked out by the pe!!oner-Kamaljit Verma and the same was executed by accused-Gaganpreet Singh @ Gaggu, Karandip Singh @ Keepa son of Kuldip Ram resident of village Mallu Pota and one Baba Amritsaria. EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER The pe!!oner-Kamaljit Verma was named by his co-accused-Gaganpreet Singh @ Gaggu, who has been arrested in the present case and a .32 bore pistol was recovered from him. It is further custodial interroga!on of the Pe!!oner-Kamaljit Verma is required to extract evidence against him. NEED FOR POLICE CUSTODY The Pe!!oner-Kamaljit Verma is the main accused in the present case, who had chalked out the en!re conspiracy to rob the complainant Pardip Kumar Raju and therefore, his custodial interroga!on is required for order/judgment. 2 ascertaining the iden!ty of Baba Amritsaria and for comple!ng the chain of events of the present case."

¶7Given that the evidence collected so far is in the form of a disclosure statement, it cannot be jus!fied for custodial interroga!on to fish evidence against him.

¶8Pre-trial incarcera!on should not be a replica of post-convic!on sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu!on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of an!cipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jus!fy custodial interroga!on or pre-trial incarcera!on.

¶9Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega!ons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus!fiability for custodial interroga!on or the pre-trial incarcera!on at this stage.

¶10Without commen!ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men!oned above, the pe!!oner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the !me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶11Given above, provided the pe!!oner is not required in any other case, the pe!!oner shall be released on bail in the FIR cap!oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa!sfac!on of the Arres!ng Officer, and if the ma<er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep!ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa!sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶12While furnishing a personal bond, the pe!!oner shall men!on the following personal iden!fica!on details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the a<es!ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶13This order is subject to the pe!!oner's complying with the following terms. The pe!!oner shall abide by all statutory bond condi!ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe!!oner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, order/judgment. 3 browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

¶14The pe!!oner is directed to join the inves!ga!on within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Inves!gator. The pe!!oner shall be in deemed custody for Sec!on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec!on 23 of BSA, 2023. The pe!!oner shall join the inves!ga!on as and when called by the Inves!ga!ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves!ga!on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu!on will be open to seeking cancella!on of the bail. During the inves!ga!on, the pe!!oner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶15Given the nature of the allega!ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pe!!oner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the vic!m un!l the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condi!on to rule out any a<empt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the vic!m. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Inves!ga!on, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bha< v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

¶16Given the background of allega!ons against the pe!!oner, it becomes paramount to protect the vic!m, and their family members, as well as the members of society, and incapacita!ng the accused would be one of the primary op!ons un!l the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui<al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restric!on is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanc!on]. Given the nature of the allega!ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pe!!oner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuni!on, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiLeen days from release from prison and inform the Inves!gator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pe!!oner shall be en!tled to renew and take it back in case of acqui<al in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restric!ng firearms would ins!ll confidence in the vic!m(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repea!ng the order/judgment. 4

¶17The condi!ons men!oned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Pe!!on (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that "The bail condi!ons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be propor!onal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail condi!ons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condi!ons that would result in the depriva!on of rights and liber!es must be eschewed."

¶18In case the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta!on arraigns another sec!on of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new sec!on prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sec!ons men!oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec!on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec!ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec!ons men!oned above; then, in that case, the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pe!!oner no!ce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶19This bail is condi!onal, and the founda!onal condi!on is that if the pe!!oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applica!on for cancella!on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶20Any observa!on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶21A cer!fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe!!oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a<est it to be a true copy. If the a<es!ng officer wants to verify its authen!city, such an officer can also verify its authen!city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a<es!ng bonds.

¶22Pe11on allowed in terms men!oned above. All pending applica!ons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

29.11.2024 Jyo!-II Whether reportable: No.JYOTI order/judgment. 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 13.11.2024 Pronounced on: 29.11.2024 Kamaljit Verma ...Pe!!oner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Ms. Taranjit Kaur Hundal, Advocate, for the pe!!oner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. ****