Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manish Yadav vs State Of Haryana on 29 November, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733
CRM-M-40139-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-40139-2024
Reserved on: 12.11.2024
Pronounced on: 29.11.2024
Manish Yadav ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 247 21.05.2024 Hisar City (Haryana) 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 506 IPC (Section 307 IPC added later on)
1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.
2. In paragraph 21 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows:
"2. That brief facts of the case are that the present case has been registered on the complaint of Sumit Kumar son of Kuldeep resident of village Singhwa Ragho, Distt. Hisar. It was alleged that the complainant is resident of above noted address. It was alleged that the complainant is student of GJU university and studying in B.A. Final year. It was stated by the complainant that he is residing as a tenant in the House of Naresh Kumar son of Tekchand resident of New Rishi Nagar, Hisar. On 17.5.2024 complainant was sitting in a Barber shop for getting his haircut where Manish Yadav son of surender Kumar (present petitioner), Amit Boora and Bachi Yadav entered the Barber shop and gave slap as well as fist 1 1 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024 blows to the complainant. On 20.5.2024 Manish Yadav son of surrender resident of village Mirzapur (present petitioner) was sitting on Honda Activa scooty in street No. 2 of Rishi Nagar, Hisar and complainant was coming from his rental accommodation and going towards bus stand, where Manish Yadav (present petitioner) after seeing the complainant started running from there and when complainant chased him then Manish Yadav (present petitioner) entered into Surendra Gupta hospital and there Manish (present petitioner) was given beatings by the complainant and thereafter, complainant left the spot and gone to his rental house. On the same day at about 4:30 PM complainant along with his friend Roopak son of Rajesh resident of village kanoh, Manish son of Sugad resident of village kundal were sitting in room of complainant at that time Manish Yadav (present petitioner), Ankit Yadav, Bachchi Yadav and Amit Boora all residents of village Mirzapur carrying wooden Dundas in their hand along with 10-12 other boys entered the room and started beating complainant, it was stated that when his friend Roopak and Manish tried to rescue the complainant from the clutches of accused persons then they also gave beatings to Roopak and Manish. It was alleged that Ankit Yadav gave dunda blow on the head of Roopak and when complainant along with his friend were trying to save themselves then they all jumped from second floor of the house in the street. It was alleged that all the accused persons criminally intimidated-them and after seeing the public ran from there along with-their-respective weapons. It was alleged that in the meanwhile friends of the complainant came on this spot and after arranging a vehicle they took him for treatment to GH Hisar. It was alleged that Roopak suffered serious injuries and for this reason he was shifted to Jindal hospital, Hisar and Manish after treatment left for his house and compliment also after the treatment left for his house with this prayer was made for taking action against Manish Yadav (present petitioner), Ankit Yadav, Bachchi Yadav and Amit Boora along with 10-12 other boys."
4. The 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.
5. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.
6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the status report, 2 2 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024 which read as follows:
"3. That the statement of complainant was got recorded on 21.5.2024 in the presence of his friend Manish Kumar son of Sugad resident of village kundal. It is pertinent to mention here that online ruka from GH Hisar was received on 20.5.2024 with regard to injuries sustained to Roopak son of Rajesh, Manish son of Sugad and Sumit son of kuldeep who were admitted in GH, Hisar upon which the police official of PP Bus Stand, Hisar after reaching GH, Hisar obtained the MLR of all the injured and an application was made for recording the statement of injured upon which doctor declared Roopak and Manish as LAMA and Sumit Kumar was declared unfit for statement thereafter, the police official after receiving an information that injured Roopak is admitted at Jindal hospital, Hisar moved an application for recording the statement of injured Roopak where doctor declare him unfit for statement. Today on 21.5.2024 Sumit Kumar son of kuldeep came at PP Bus Stand, Hisar and got his statement recorded which was duly signed by him.
4. That the doctor in MLR No. VBM/878/HSR/2024 dated 20.5.2024 pertaining to Sumit shown total 10 injuries out of which injury No.1, 2 were advised for General Surgeon opinion, injury No. 3, 4, 5 were advised dental opinion, injury No. 6 advised ENT opinion and injury No. 7, 8, 9, 10 were advised ortho opinion, copy of MLR of injured Sumit is Annexure R-1. Similarly, in MLR No. VBM/876/HSR/2024 dated 20.5.2024 pertaining to injured Roopak total 6 injuries were shown out of which injury No.1 was advised NCCT head and advised General Surgeon opinion, injury No. 2, 3, 4, 5 were advised ortho opinion and injury No. 6 during course of treatment, copy of MLR of injured Roopak is Annexure R-2. Similarly, in MLR No. VBM/877/HSR/2024 dated 20.5.2024 pertaining to Manish total 4 injuries were shown out of which injury No.1, 4 were advised general surgeon opinion and injury No. 2 and 3 were advised ortho opinion, copy of MLR of Manish is Annexure R- 3. All the injuries were shown to be caused with blunt weapon. From the perusal of the statement of the complainant as well as from the perusal of these MLRs the offences under section 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 452 IPC were found to have been committed in pursuance of which an information was sent through HC Vijay Kumar at P.S. City Hisar and thereafter, the above noted case was registered.
5. That after registration of the case the investigating officer on the same 3 3 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024 day prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence. Thereafter, during the course of investigation on 25.6.2024 investigating officer moved an application to the medical officer of GH, Hisar for giving opinion with regard to the nature of injuries in pursuance of which the doctor of GH Hisar on the basis of bed head ticket of Jindal hospital, Hisar pertaining to injured Roopak opined that the Injury No. 1 on the head of the Roopak was grievous in nature and was dangerous to life whereas injury number 2, 3, 4, 5 are simple in nature. Copy of opinion regarding nature of injuries is Annexure R-4."
7. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the bail petition, which read as follows:
"8. That it is worth to mention here that the MLR of injured Rupak was prepared at 04.03 PM in 20.05.2024 whereas till 04.12 PM, the petitioner was admitted in the General Hospital Hisar the petitioner has not participated in the crime.
9. That the petitioner has also moved an application regarding the injuries sustain by the petitioner against the accused party before the police for lodging of FIR but police has not taken any action upon the complaint of the father of the petitioner. The complaint was given to SP Hisar on 23.05.2024 because due to fear the petitioner has not told anything to his family members and when the family members came to know regarding the serious condition of the petitioner, then the petitioner told the whole story and the present application was given. The copy of complained dated 23.05.2024 is attached herewith as Annexure P-5."
8. The possibility of some truth in the petitioner's stand cannot be ruled out altogether. No averment in the reply explicitly disputes the petitioner's stand.
9. Pre-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.
10. Given 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 would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage.
44 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024
11. Without 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.
12. Given 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 matter 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.
13. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:
1. AADHAR number
2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.
3. Mobile number (If available)
4. E-Mail id (If available)
14. This 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.
15. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation 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 Investigator. 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. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.
16. Given 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 5 5 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024 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 attempt 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 Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.
17. Given 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 acquittal. 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 fifteen 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 acquittal 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.
18. The 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."
19. In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station 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 6 6 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:162733 CRM-M-40139-2024 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.
20. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.
21. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
22. A 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 attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.
23. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
29.11.2024
anju rani
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
7
7 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2024 11:12:07 :::