Ram Kumar v. Central Bureau Of Investigation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 08.08.2022

Date of Pronouncement: 20.09.2022

Ram Kumar

...Petitioner (s)

Versus

Central Bureau of Investigation

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Ms. Shubhra Singh, Standing Counsel for respondent -CBI.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections RC00520 30.06.2020 ACB Chandigarh 120-B, 420, 406, 409 IPC and 20A0009 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1.

The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail. 2.

Vide order dated 20-01-2022, the petitioner was granted interim protection, which is continuing till date.

3.

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

5.

Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail. REASONING:

6.

The petitioner was initially not arrested and now granted interim protection, and during the interregnum, there is no allegation that he had intimidated the victim or victim's family or the witnesses or that he had hampered the investigation, or despite being called to join the investigation, he did not appear before the investigator. Given the above, there would be no justification to discontinue the interim protection, and the same is made absolute subject to the petitioner complying with the terms of the bail order and the following additional conditions.

7.

Within fifteen days from today, the petitioner shall forward to the Investigator/SHO and the complainant/victim(s) the complete details of bank account numbers with addresses, fixed deposits, DEMAT account numbers, the current market value of jewelry, sovereign metals, all precious articles, held either individually or jointly, and cash-in-hand. If the petitioner fails to comply with this condition, then on this ground alone, the bail might be canceled, and the complainant may file any such application for the cancellation of bail, and State shall file the said application.

8.

Till the completion of the trial, the petitioner shall not contact, call, text, message, remark, stare, stalk, make any gestures or express any unusual or inappropriate, verbal or otherwise objectionable behavior towards the victim and victim's family, either physically, or through phone call or any other social media, through any other mode, nor shall unnecessarily roam around the victim's home.

9.

The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavour that the accused does not repeat the offence and the aggrieved party may initiate steps for recovery of money attributed to the petitioner. In Sushila Aggarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the Constitutional Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restrictive conditions. In Sumit Mehta v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi, (2013)15 SCC 570, Para 11, Supreme Court holds that while exercising power Under Section 438 of the Code, the Court is duty-bound to strike a balance between the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of investigation of the police. While exercising utmost

restraint, the Court can impose conditions countenancing its object as permissible under the law to ensure an uninterrupted and unhampered investigation. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 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." Petition allowed in aforesaid terms. Interim order is made absolute subject to strict compliance of all terms and conditions. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE September 20, 2022 AK Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.