Dheeraj v. State of Haryana

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta1on Sec1ons 214 30.10.2024 Sadar Bahadurgarh, Dis+. 115(2), 351(3), 140(3), 3(5) of Jhajjar, Haryana BNS, 2023

¶1The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC, seeking anticipatory bail.

¶2In paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶3The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: "xxx xxx I was present at Bahadurgarh on dated 29.10.2024 than I received a telephonic call from Yogesh alias Sachin S/o Subhash of my village and he asked me to meet. I reached my house at about 9:30 PM then Yogesh alias Sachin asked me to meet him in the park of the village. When I reached near the park, where Yogesh alias Sachin was already standing there. I and Yogesh alias Sachin were talking, then from behind Dheeraj S/o Rajeram, Praveen S/o Azad resident of village Shahpur came there in Alto car. Then Yogesh alias Sachin, Dheeraj and Praveen all together started bea1ng me with kicks and fist blows and they forcibly kidnapped me and put me in Alto car and they taken me and a3er some JYOTI 1me they stopped the car in lonely place just ahead of SDM school in order/judgment. 1 Deshalpur village. Then all accused persons threw me out of the car and started bea1ng me by breaking s1cks from trees. They again forcibly put me in the car and went towards the village Bupania. Parveen called Vicky S/o Ramniwas and Mohit of Bupania village on his mobile. Then Vicky and Mohit came there and a3er seeing my condi1on Vicky and Mohit Saved me from them. All three boys threatened me that this 1me you are saved but whenever we will get chance, we will kill you. A3er that they dropped me at my home at village Shahpur. Please strict ac1on be taken against them. Upon this applica1on FIR No. 214 dated 30.10.2024 Under Sec1on 140(3), 115, 351(3), 3(5) BNS registered at Police Sta1on Sadar Bahadurgarh Dis;. Jhajjar."

¶4The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and his family.

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

¶6It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows: "4 That all accused persons concealed themselves and not appearing before the inves1ga1ng officer. However, dandas and s1cks which were used by the accused to beat the complainant Sonu are yet to be recovered from the accused persons. That mobile phones of the accused are yet to be recovered. 5 That the pe11oner along with other co-accused kidnapped the complainant and beaten him mercilessly with s1cks, kicks and fist blows and they also extended threats to kill him. Custodial interroga1on of the pe11oner is required for proper and thorough inves1ga1on."

¶7The complainant did not a+ribute any motive for the assault.

¶8Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration.

¶9Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there order/judgment. 2 would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage.

¶10The petitioner's bail shall not be treated as a precedent for granting bail to the other co-accused with a higher role.

¶11Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶12Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting 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 accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶13While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the a+esting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶14This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, 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.

¶15The pe11oner is directed to join the inves1ga1on 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 Inves1gator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail.JYOTI order/judgment. 3 During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶16Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim until the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any a+empt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigation, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bha+ v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

¶17Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the victim, and their family members, as well as the members of society, and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui+al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restriction 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 sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiKeen days from release from prison and inform the Investigator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and take it back in case of acqui+al in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the offense.

¶18The conditions mentioned 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 Petition (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 conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed."

¶19In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station order/judgment. 4 arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶20This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State and the Victim may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶21Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶22A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner 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+esting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for a+esting bonds.

¶23Pe11on allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

13.12.2024 Jyo1-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 02.12.2024 Pronounced on: 13.12.2024 Dheeraj ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. A.S. Gulati, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. A.G. Haryana. ****