Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ankush vs State Of Haryana on 30 August, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114674
1
CRM-M-57899-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-57899-2023
Reserved on: 09.08.2024
Pronounced on: 30.08.2024
Ankush ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. AG, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
560 28.05.2019 Sadar Karnal, 224, 225, 307, 120-B & 34
District Karnal IPC and 25 of Arms Act
1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC, 1973, seeking regular bail.
2. Per paragraph 13 of the bail petition and Para 5 of the reply, the accused has the following criminal antecedents:
Sr. No. FIR No. Date Offenses Police Station
1 566 2023 25/54/59 of Arms Sadar Karnal
Act
2 225 2023 323, 307, 387, 506, City Thanesar, Kurukshetra
34 & 120-B IPC
and 25/54/59 of
Arms Act
3 794 2023 42(a) of Prisons Civil Lines, Karnal
Act, 386, 511 IPC
4 13 2023 148, 149, 323, 326, Sadar Thanesar, Kurukshetra
307, 379-B, 201,
120-B IPC and 16
of UAPA
5 923 2022 307, 120-B IPC Sadar Karnal
and Arms Act
6 705 2018 395, 397 IPC and Bahadurgarh, Jhajjar
25 of arms Act
7 399 2017 307, 186, 332, 333, Civil Lines, Karnal
353, 120-B IPC
8 23 2021 387, 120-B, 285 Krishna Gate, Kurukshetra
IPC and 25/54/59
of Arms Act
1
1 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2024 23:11:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114674
2
CRM-M-57899-2023
9 286 2019 148, 149, 302, 452, Hathin, Palwal
120-B IPC and
25/54/59 of Arms
Act
10 118 2019 307, 332, 353, 336, Mahajan, Bikaner
34 IPC and 3/25 of
Arms Act
11 487 2019 307, 420, 467, 468, Suratgarh, Ganganagar
471, 2016, 120-B,
34 IPC and
25/57/59 of Arms
act
12 67 2020 392 IPC and Butana, Karnal
25/54/59 of Arms
Act
13 650 2021 307, 387 IPC and Pundri, Kaithal
25/54/59 of Arms
Act
14 698 2021 387, 506 IPC Krishna Gate, Kurukshetra
15 749 2019 174-A Civil Lines, Karnal
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:
"That I have scrutinized the case file and other relevant record pertaining case and found that on to this 28.05.2019, information was received from Control Room, Karnal that near New Bus Stand, Baldi three persons had fired gun shot at police officials and managed to free an undertrial from police custody. Upon this information, ASI Sultan alongwith other police officials reached New Bus Stand where it was found that the injured police officials had been taken to Kalpana Chawla Medical College, Karnal for treatment. Thereafter, ASI Sultan alongwith other police officials reached Kalpana Chawla Medical College, Karnal and after obtaining the opinion of doctor recorded the statement of injured police official SI Suresh Pal to the effect that on 28.05.2019 an under trial lodged in Jagadhri Jail namely Sunil @ Monu @ Khira was to be produced in the Court of Shri Rajender Singh Dhanda, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal in case FIR No.475/16 under Section 302, 34 IPC and 25-54-59 Arms Act, Sadar, Karnal. He alongwith HC Vinod Kumar and Constable Sandeep Kumar were deputed to produce the undertrial in Court. After production of the undertrial in Court, they set out on return journey to Jagadhri Jail. At about 12:15 pm when they were standing at New Bus Stand near counter no.2, then all of a sudden three young persons aged about 25- 26 years came and one of them put spray into the eyes of police officials and another person who was armed with a country made pistol fired at HC Vinod Kumar, however, the bullet missed him. He took the carbine of HC Vinod Kumar and just as he was positioning himself in order to fire the weapon, the said person gave a fire shot on his left leg. The said person again fired at him however, he moved towards the side of the bus and the bullet missed him. One another person fired two shots at Constable Sandeep which hit him on his legs and he fell down. Thereafter, the assailants managed to free the under trial and in the scuffle that ensued, the country made pistol was snatched by HC Vinod Kumar from them. The 2 2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2024 23:11:29 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114674 3 CRM-M-57899-2023 under trial Sunil @ Monu @ Khira alongwith his three companions had attacked the police party with the intent to kill them and the said persons managed to free the under trial from lawful custody and necessary action be taken against them. On the basis of the said statement, the present FIR No.560 dated 28.05.2019 was got registered under Section 224, 225, 307, 34 IPC and Section 25/54/59 of Arms Act."
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 their family.
5. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.
6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:
"That after lodging of the aforesaid FIR police commenced the investigation. During the course of investigation, information was received that accused Sunil @ Monu @ Khira and two of his accomplices namely Ankush (present petitioner-accused) and Ankit Pandit had been taken into custody by police in case FIR No.118 dated 13.09.2019 u/s 332, 353, 336, 34 IPC and 3, 25 Arms Act P.S Mahajan, District Bikaner. Accordingly, they were taken into custody in the present case and their confessional statements in regards to commission the spraying chilly of spray the offences of and then firing bullets at the police officials and freeing the under trial Sunil @ Monu @Khira from the lawful custody of the police officials in the present FIR No.560 dated 28.05.2019 were recorded on the basis of which the offences under Section 120-B, 216 IPC were introduced. The present accused/petitioner namely Ankush is in judicial custody since 25.04.2022 in the present case. Co-accused Manjeet @ Bina was joined with investigation and arrested on 03.10.2019. He suffered disclosure statement in pursuance to which motorcycle used in the occurrence and certain other incriminating material was recovered at his instance. Another accused Abhishek @ Githa was arrested 05.11.2019 and his confessional statement was recorded in pursuance to which pistol.32 bore alongwith two live cartridges and vehicle used in the recovered at his occurrence were instance. accused Mukesh Kumar who Another co- was already in custody in case FIR No.67/20 under Section 379-B, 392 IPC and Section 25-54-59 Arms Act, PS Butana was joined with investigation and arrested in the present case 18.06.2021. He suffered disclosure statement regarding his involvement in the present case."
7. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, as per paragraph 1 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since 02-10-2019. Per the custody certificate dated 15.07.2024, the petitioner's total custody in this FIR is 04 years, 09 months & 02 days. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability further pre-trial incarceration at this stage.
33 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2024 23:11:29 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114674 4 CRM-M-57899-2023
8. 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.
9. 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 concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.
10. 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)
11. This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms.
12. 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.
13. 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 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.
14. 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].
44 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2024 23:11:29 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114674 5 CRM-M-57899-2023 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.
15. 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."
16. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
17. 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.
18. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 30.08.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 5 5 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2024 23:11:29 :::