Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vishal Joshi vs State Of Punjab And Another on 17 November, 2009
Author: Jora Singh
Bench: Jora Singh
Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009
Date of decision: 17.11.2009
Vishal Joshi
... Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH.
Present: Mr.Puneet Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.P.S.Sidhu, Addl.AG, Punjab.
Mr.Dheeraj Chawla, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.
...
JORA SINGH, J.
By this common judgment, I propose to dispose of two connected petitions, i.e., Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 (Vishal Joshi vs. State of Punjab and another) and Crl.Misc.No.M-19410 of 2009 (Vishal Joshi vs. State of Punjab and another).
Crl.Misc.No.M-14450 of 2009 was instituted by Vishal Joshi under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail order dated 15.4.2009 passed by Hon'ble High Court releasing Munish Rai @ Toni on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Crl.Misc. No.M-19410 of 2009 was instituted by Vishal Joshi for cancellation of bail order dated 27.5.2005 passed by Hon'ble High Court releasing Gurinder Pal Singh on bail in FIR No.306 dated 6.11.2008 under Sections 307/324/427/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana.
Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 2
As per the orders of Hon'ble High Court, Munish Rai and Gurinder Pal Singh were ordered to be released on bail on the allegation that as per FIR, no injury was attributed to Munish Rai and Gurinder Pal Singh. Munish Rai was in custody w.e.f. 20.1.2009 and was ordered to be released on bail vide order dated 15.4.2009.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that Gurinder Pal Singh and Munish Rai are the members of gang of criminals headed by Karanbir Singh @ Kokan and Jaswinder Singh @ Jassi. Munish Rai after bail is threatening the petitioner not to pursue the case. Before bail, the accused were threatening the petitioner not oppose the bail petitions. The petitioner was forced to effect compromise. After bail, the petitioner was threatened on telephone not to pursue the case and not to depose in favour of the prosecution. If deposed against the accused, then threatened to eliminate the petitioner and his family members. At 9.30 PM on 5.5.2009 and at 1.18 AM and again at 1.22 AM on 8.5.2009 during night time, the petitioner was threatened to effect compromise. Matter was brought to the notice of the police and as per instructions of the police, petitioner had recorded the conversation. In case, bail orders are not cancelled then the petitioner will not be in a position to appear in the Court in support of the prosecution story. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon 2005(3) SCC 143 Panchanan Mishra vs. Gigambar Mishra, and 2005(8) SC 21, State of UP through CBI vs. Amarmani Tripathi.
Learned counsel for the contesting respondents argued that the argument advanced at this stage by learned counsel for the petitioner was advanced at the time of decision of bail petitions. Keeping in view the submissions of learned counsel for the present contesting respondents, bail Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 3 petitions were accepted. While on bail, no threat to the petitioner. As per conversations recorded by the petitioner, the petitioner was not threatened, but only was requested not to get any false FIR registered against the contesting respondents. Petitions are filed simply to harass the respondents. Munish Rai or Gurinder Pal Singh did not cause injury to the petitioner, which was found to be dangerous to life. Injury punishable under Section 307 IPC was not attributed to the respondents, namely, Gurinder Pal Singh or Munish Rai. Different applications were filed by the petitioner simply to create evidence for cancellation of bail. If the contesting respondents are the members of the gang headed by Karanbir Singh @ Kokan and Jaswinder Singh @ Jassi, then very easy for them to cause injury.
I have gone through the file and am of the opinion that no ground to interfere and set aside the bail orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court.
Vide order dated 15.4.2009, Munish Rai was ordered to be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., because he was in custody w.e.f. 20.1.2009. Allegation of the petitioner was that opposite party was threatening him. While releasing Munish Rai on bail, it was observed that if there is a threat to the complainant, then he (petitioner may avail remedy under the law. Such type of allegation cannot be taken as ground for declining bail. Ultimately, vide order dated 15.4.2009, Munish Rai was ordered to be released on bail.
Vide order dated 27.5.2009, Gurinder Pal Singh was ordered to be released on bail on the allegation that FIR was registered on 6.11.2008, whereas supplementary statement of Vishal Joshi was recorded on 14.11.2008. Challan has been presented. Custody of Gurinder Pal Singh is Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 4 not required for the purpose of investigation. Ultimately, Gurinder Pal Singh was ordered to be released on bail.
Main allegation of the petitioner is that after bail, Gurinder Pal Singh and Munish Rai threatened to eliminate him and his family members, if appeared in the Court to support the prosecution story and not effected compromise. Petitioner has attached Annexure P-5, i.e., copy of telephonic conversation between Munish Rai and Vishal Joshi. Same is reproduced as under:-
"Munish Rai called from Mobile No.9356319000 Vishal Joshi on Mobile No.9888076000 at 9.30 PM.
Munish Rai @ Tony: Hello
Vishal : Yes tell
Munish Rai @ Tony: You tell. You made a phone call.
Vishal : How do you know Sabrit, you tell me first.
(Savrit is an employee of Vishal Joshi who was threatened by Munish Rai).
Munish Rai @ Tony: He was my brother's class mate.
Vishal : Why are you spoiling your life.
Munish Rai @ Tony: If you want to get registered case
against me get registered case against me, get them justified. If I commit a mistake then get registered cases. I do not mind if cases are registered after I commit a mistake. Get registered justified cases.
Vishal: Have I got unjustified cases registered against you ever? It is my will whether justified or unjustified, what you did was that justified?Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 5
Munish Rai @ Tony: I will not call you after today. I will come on the date of the case and go away and you also do the same from now onwards.
Vishal: Whatever comes to my mind, I will do that. Whether I do correct or wrong.
Munish Rai @ Tony: OK now if you commit mistake it is your own will, if you commit mistake then you will have to suffer.
Vishal: You all injured Vaibhav by attacking with kirpan and he doesn't have father. Rs.20.00 lacs have been spent on his treatment.
Munish Rai @ Tony: You listen to me, if he did not have father then he should have thought before fighting at the liquor vend that he doesn't have a father.
Vishal: He did not hit any of you with kirpan, it was only heated exchange of words and abuses and you attacked and hit him with kirpans. You came on one phone and inflicted injuries with kirpan. Whether you are a big rogue? Munish Rai @ Tony: I had friendship and brotherhood, in friendship I hae hit, I had the guts so I hit. Vishal: You did not understand what I said that you are such a big rogue (badmash) that on some bodies one phone you came with kirpan and went away after hitting with kirpan. Whether these things are justified.Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 6
Munish Rai @ Tony: He had committed a mistake, he should not have done so. If I commit a mistake, I will also suffer.
Vishal: Was it such a big mistake that you people could kill him.
Munish Rai @ Tony: Had to inflict less injuries but got inflicted more. What is our mistake.
Vishal: OK, you had to hit less but more were hit;
Munish Rai @ Tony: Yes.
Vishal: OK let him be perfectly all right then we will see.
Munish Rai @ Tony: What do you want to see, you want to
hit me?
Vishal: All this has to be seen after words. I have already
told you that we would go as per law and law is not going to spare anybody.
Munish Rai @ Tony: You will get cases registered against me. OK get three-four cases registered.
Vishal: OK I will get registered.
Munish Rai @ Tony: OK then get registered, we will meet
in the court. When you will come to the court then I will see and talk to you.
Vishal: The one who is speaking behind you let him also talk.
Phone disconnected."
Annexure P-5 no where shows that Gurinder Pal Singh or Munish Rai threatened the petitioner to eliminate him or his family Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 7 members. On telephone, request of the respondents was that false FIR be not got registered against them. If there is a genuine case, then the petitioner is at liberty to get the same registered.
In Panchanan Mishra's case (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under;-
"B. Criminal Procedure Code, Section 439(2)- Cancellation of bail- Object underlying the cancellation of bail is to protect the fair trial and secure justice being done to the society by preventing the accused who is set at liberty by the bail order from tampering with the evidence in heinous crime and if there is delay in such a case the underlying object of cancellation of bail practically loses all its purpose and significance- Once a person released on bail in serious criminal cases where the punishment is quite stringent and deterrent the accused in order to get away from the clutches of the same indulge in various activities like tampering with the prosecution witnesses, threatening the family members of the deceased victim and also create problems of law and order situation. In State of UP through CBI's case (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:-
"The general rule that the Supreme Court will not ordinarily interfere in matters relating to bail, is subject to exceptions where there are special circumstances and when the basic requirements for grant of bail are completely ignored by the High Court- AT. a politician and ex-Minister, and his wife MT along with others hatching conspiracy to commit murder in Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 8 question- Grant of bail by High Court to AT and MT merely on ground that extra judicial confession made by co-accused implicating them in crime was inadmissible in evidence, held, not proper- Material on record disclosing prima facie existence of the aforesaid conspiracy- AT from the day of murder trying to interfere, detract and mislead the investigation and to threaten and coerce witnesses- Reasonable ground for apprehension that the wife MT, if not taken in custody, might take over the task of tampering with the evidence and manipulating/threatening witnesses- Therefore, held, it was necessary to interfere with High Court's order- Bail cancelled."
No dispute about the law laid down in the above cited authorities, but in the present case, in case there was a threat, then complaint in writing be sent to the police. Simple allegation of the petitioner is that the matter was brought to the notice of the police. Then as per police request recorded telephonic conversation. If the allegation of the petitioner was genuine one, then question is why no action was taken by the police. When criminal case is pending and the accused are on bail, then very easy for the complainant to state that he is being threatened, either to effect compromise or not to appear in the Court as a witness. Petitions only against Gurinder Pal Singh and Munish Rai for cancellation of bail orders. There are other co-accused also, who are on bail. No witness appearing in the Court stated that out of fear of the accused, he is not in a position to bring true facts before the Court.
Crl.Misc.No.M-14550 of 2009 9
All discussed above show that petitions were instituted simply to harass the opposite party on bail. Both the petitions being without merit are dismissed.
17.11.2009 ( JORA SINGH )
pk JUDGE