Punjab-Haryana High Court
Suresh Chander vs State Of Haryana on 5 July, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083385
CRM-M-25362-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-25362-2024
Date of Decision: 05.07.2024
Suresh Chander ...Pe oner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Ms. Pooja Jaglan, Advocate
for the pe oner.
Mr. Sanjeev Panwar, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Sta on Sec ons 07 04.03.2024 An Corrup on 7, 7A of PC Act, 1988 and Bureau, Karnal 384, 120-B IPC
1. The pe oner incarcerated in the FIR cap oned above has come up before this Court under Sec on 439 CrPC seeking bail.
2. In paragraph 19 of the bail pe on, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. Counsel for the pe oner has handed over affidavit declaring assets to the Inves gator in the Court itself. Pe oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi ons and is also voluntarily agreeable to the condi on that ll the conclusion of the trial before the trial court, the pe oner shall keep only one mobile number, which is men oned in AADHAR card, and within fiBeen days of release from prison undertakes to disconnect all other mobile numbers. The pe oner contends that the further pre-trial incarcera on would cause an irreversible injus ce to the pe oner and family.
4. The State opposes bail, however does not dispute the factum of handing over of affidavit.
11 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-07-2024 02:58:27 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083385 CRM-M-25362-2024
5. Facts of the case are being taken from status report dated 03.07.2024 filed by concerned DySP which reads as under:-
"2. The true facts of the case are that on 04-03- 2024, complainant Jayki @ Johny handed over his complaint to the inves ga ng officer i.e. Kamaljeet DSP, wherein he had stated that he (complainant) is an agriculturist and running a hotel near Village Cha-ar and he (complainant) had applied for an electricity connec on for his hotel on TH COM 20-2-2024 in Sub-Division, Uchana, Jind, in the name of his mother 'Nanhi Devi'. Therea5er, pe oner Suresh Chander J.E. Visited his hotel twice for preparing the es mate report for the said electricity connec on and demanded some kharcha-pani and threatened that otherwise he will not get the connec on and further instructed complainant to meet Jai Bhagwan (co-accused) in this regard. When complainant met Jai Bhagwan and discussed about his electricity connec on, then he (co-accused) disclosed that he (co-accused) had discussed the ma-er with pe oner Suresh Chander J.E. and demanded a bribe of sum of Rs. 20,000/- for gran ng the said electricity connec on, on which complainant objected and showed his inability to pay off the huge amount. Therea5er, Jai Bhagwan (co-accused) threatened the complainant by saying that he will not prepare the field report and pe oner Suresh Chander, J.E. will also not prepare the es mate report for the connec on of the complainant, if bribe amount is not paid. Therea5er, complainant under pressure/compulsion, agreed to give Rs. 20,000/- as bribe and therea5er on 03-03-2024, pe oner Suresh Chander, J.E. visited the hotel of the complainant and told the complainant about the prepara on of es mate for his electricity connec on and instructed the complainant to give the bribe amount of Rs. 20,000/- to Jai Bhagwan (co-accused), but he (complainant) didn't want to pay the said bribe money to the accused persons. Hence, the present FIR No. 07 dated 04-03-2024 (Annexure P-1) was registered against pe oner Suresh Chander J.E and co- accused Jai Bhagwan @ Nanha u/s 120-B, 384 IPC and 7, 7A PC 2 2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-07-2024 02:58:28 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083385 CRM-M-25362-2024 Act, Police Sta on, An Corrup on Bureau, Karnal Range, Karnal.
3. That therea5er on 4-3-2024, the Superintendent of Police An Corrup on Bureau, Karnal appointed Sh. Prateek, Naib Tehsildar, Julana as Independent witness/Gaze-ed Officer upon which the Gaze-ed Officer/Independent witness further appointed his reader Sh. Deepak Kumar, as Shadow Witness. Raiding team was cons tuted and a5er applying Phenolphthalein powder on currency notes of Rs.20,000/-, the said notes were handed over to the complainant Jayki @ Johny, who was instructed to talk with Jai Bhagwan for his work and on raising his demand, the complainant was instructed to hand over Rs.20,000/- tainted money to Jai Bhagwan, (co-accused). The Shadow witness was also instructed to see and hear the conversa on between complainant and accused and was further directed to give the appointed signal to the raiding team. List of Currency notes, demonstra on wash, memo of handing over the notes and the search memo etc. were prepared.
Therea5er, the complainant and shadow witness proceeded to meet Jai Bhagwan @ Nanha and a5er some me the complainant, the shadow witness acted accordingly and therea5er Jai Bhagwan @ Nanha (co-accused) was apprehended red handed on spot. Upon asking him to produce the bribe money, co-accused Jai Bhagwan @Nanha got recovered the bribe amount/tainted money of Rs. 20,000/-, holding in his right hand, on spot and therea5er Jai Bhagwan @ Nanha (co- accused) was arrested in the present case and he voluntarily suffered his disclosure statement and disclosed that he use to work privately with employees of electricity department and he took the bribe money of Rs. 20,000/- from complainant upon asking/instruc ons of Suresh Chander, J.E. (pe oner-accused), in the greed of his (Jai Bhagwan) share of Rs. 5,000/-, out of the total bribe amount of Rs.20,000/-. The true translated copy of the disclosure statement of co-accused 3 3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-07-2024 02:58:28 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083385 CRM-M-25362-2024 Jai Bhagwan is annexed herewith as Annexure R-1. Therea5er, hands of Jai Bhagwan (co-accused) were got washed and the solu on thereof turned light pink. The currency notes, nips of hand washes were converted into sealed parcels and were taken into possession vide separate recovery memo's which were also signed by the respected witnesses. Site plan of the place of occurrence and recovery were also prepared and the inves ga ng officer also recorded the statement of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C.
4. That during the course of inves ga on, complainant Jayki @ Johny produced the audio recording device, before the inves ga ng officer, wherein demand of bribe/conversa on was recorded among the complainant Jayki @ Johny and accused persons viz Jai Bhagwan (co-accused) and Suresh Chander, J.E. (pe oner-accused), upon which the inves ga ng officer with the help of HC Sanjay Kumar ACB, Unit Jind, prepared two audio CD's and its transcript in Hindi and a5er conver ng the audio CD's into a separate sealed parcels, the audio CD's, its transcripts and cer ficates u/s 65-B, Evidence Act were taken into possession vide memo, which was signed by respec ve witnesses. The inves ga ng officer also recorded the statement of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C on even dates. The true translated copy of transcripts/recordings between complainant, pe oner and co-accused are annexed herewith Annexures R-2 and R-3.
5. That during the course of inves ga on on 4-3-24, pe oner Suresh Chander, J.E was arrested in the present case and during interroga on on 5-3-2024, he suffered his disclosure statement voluntarily and disclosed that he had instructed co- accused Jai Bhagwan to take Rs. 20,000/- as bribe from Johny@ Jayki on his behalf and out of which Jai Bhagwan share was Rs. 5,000/- and remaining bribe of Rs. 15,000/- was his (pe oner) share. The true translated copy of the disclosure statement of pe oner- accused Suresh Chander, J.E is annexed herewith as Annexure R-4."
6. I have gone through the record and heard counsel for the par es.
44 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-07-2024 02:58:28 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083385 CRM-M-25362-2024
7. Given the nature of allega on, peculiar facts of this case, declara on of assets by the pe oner and period of pre-trial incarcera on which is more than two months, there is no jus fica on for further pre-trial incarcera on.
8. Given the undertaking of pe oner, he is directed not to keep more than one prepaid SIM, i.e., one pre-paid mobile phone number, ll the conclusion of the trial; however, this restric on is only on prepaid SIMs [mobile numbers] and not on post-paid connec ons or landline numbers. The pe oner must comply with this condi on within fiBeen days of release from prison. The concerned DySP shall also direct all the telecom service providers to deac vate all prepaid SIM cards and prepaid mobile numbers issued to the pe oner, except the one that is men oned as the primary number/ default number linked with the AADHAAR card and further that ll the no objec on from the concerned SHO, the mobile service providers shall not issue second pre-paid SIM/ mobile number in the pe oner's name. Since, as on date, in India, there are only four prominent mobile service providers, namely BSNL, Airtel, Vodafone-Idea, and Reliance Jio, any other telecom service provider are directed to comply with the direc ons of the concerned Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police, issued in this regard and disable all prepaid mobile phone numbers issued in the name of the pe oner, except the main number/default number linked with AADHAR, by taking such informa on from the pe oner's AADHAR details or any other source, for which they shall be legally en tled by this order. This condi on shall con nue ll the comple on of the trial or closure of the case, whichever is earlier. In Vernon v. The State of Maharashtra, 2023 INSC 655, [para 45], while gran ng bail under Unlawful Ac vi es (Preven on) Act, 2002, Supreme Court had directed imposi on of the similar condi on, which reads as follows, "(d) Both the appellants shall use only one Mobile Phone each, during the me they remain on bail and shall inform the Inves ga ng Officer of the NIA, their respec ve mobile numbers."
9. Given above, the pe on is allowed and order dated 24.05.2024 is made absolute. All pending applica ons, if any, stand disposed.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
05.07.2024
Jyo Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
5
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 22-07-2024 02:58:28 :::