Monu Soni v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on: 21.04.2023
Pronounced on: 11.05.2023 Monu Soni ...PeƟƟoner (s)
Versus
State of Punjab Respondent (s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Bachanpreet Singh, Advocate and Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate, for the peƟƟoner.
Mr. Harsimar Singh SiƩa, DAG, Punjab.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police StaƟon SecƟons 09.12.2021 City-2, Abohar, District Fazilka 408, 420, 120-B IPC 1.
The peƟƟoner, incarceraƟng since 07-02-2023, upon his arrest in the FIR capƟoned above, has come up before this Court under SecƟon 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.
2.
In paragraph 12 of the peƟƟon, it is declared that the accused has no criminal history.
3.
Counsel for the peƟƟoner contends that the pre-trial incarceraƟon would cause an irreversible injusƟce to the peƟƟoner and family. 4.
Counsel appearing for the State contends that the peƟƟoner has indulged in cheaƟng and thugee is raising its ugly head, and it's the Ɵme to nip the evil in the bud. REASONING:
5.
The peƟƟoner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct. Even a prima facie perusal of paragraphs 5 & 6 of the bail peƟƟon needs consideraƟon for bail. 6.
In the present case, the maximum sentence imposable for the offences menƟoned in FIR does not exceed seven years. Thus, direcƟons passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, (Para 13), apply to this peƟƟon, wherein Hon'ble
Supreme Court directed all the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to arrest the accused automaƟcally when the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine.
7.
The possibility of the accused influencing the invesƟgaƟon, tampering with evidence, inƟmidaƟng witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing jusƟce, can be taken care of by imposing elaboraƟve and stringent condiƟons. In Sushila Aggarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the ConsƟtuƟonal Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restricƟve condiƟons. 8.
Without commenƟng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons menƟoned above, the peƟƟoner makes a case for bail, subject to the following terms and condiƟons, which shall be over and above and irrespecƟve of the contents of the form of bail bonds in chapter XXXIII of CrPC, 1973. 9.
In Mahidul Sheikh v. State of Haryana, CRM-33030-2021 in CRA-S-363-2020, decided on 14-01-2022, Para 53, this Court observed, [53]. The pragmaƟc approach is that while granƟng bail with sureƟes, the "Court" and the "ArresƟng Officer" should give a choice to the accused to either furnish surety bonds or to handover a fixed deposit, or direct electronic money transfer where such facility is available, or creaƟng a lien over his bank account. The accused should also have a further opƟon to switch between the modes. The opƟon lies with the accused to choose between the sureƟes and deposits and not with the Court or the arresƟng officer. 10.
Give above, provided the accused is not required in any other case, the peƟƟoner shall be released on bail in the FIR menƟoned above, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/-) and shall furnish one surety of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/-), to the saƟsfacƟon of the concerned Court/ Judicial Magistrate having the jurisdicƟon over the Police StaƟon conducƟng the invesƟgaƟon, and in case of non-availability, any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepƟng the sureƟes, the concerned Court must saƟsfy that if the accused fails to appear in Court, then such surety is capable of producing the peƟƟoner before the Court. 11.
In the alternaƟve, the peƟƟoner may furnish a personal bond of Rs. Ten Thousand only (INR 10,000/-), and hand over to the concerned court a fixed deposit(s) for Rs. Ten Thousand only (INR 10,000/-), made in favour of Chief Judicial Magistrate of the concerned district. Said fixed deposit may be made from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 50%, or any of the well-established and stable private banks, with the clause of automaƟc renewal of the principal and the interest reverƟng to the linked account.
12.
The fixed deposit need not necessarily be made from the applicant's account. If such a fixed deposit is made in physical form, i.e., on paper, then the original receipt shall be handed over to the concerned court. If made online, its printout, countersigned by the accused, shall be given; and the depositor shall get the online liquidaƟon disabled. The applicant shall inform the concerned branch of the bank at the earliest that it has been tendered as surety. Such informaƟon be sent either by e-mail or by post/courier about the fixed deposit, whether made on paper or in any other mode, along with its number and FIR number. AŌer that, the applicant shall hand over such proof and endorsement to the concerned police staƟon. Such court shall have a lien over the deposit unƟl the case's closure, or discharged by subsƟtuƟon, or up to the expiry of the period menƟoned under S. 437-A CrPC, 1973, as the case may be. Subject to the proceedings under S. 446 CrPC, the enƟre amount of fixed deposit, less taxes, if any, shall be endorsed/returned to the depositor. 13.
It shall be the total discreƟon of the applicant to choose between surety bonds and fixed deposits. It shall also be open for the applicant to apply to the invesƟgator or the concerned court to subsƟtute fixed deposit with surety bonds and vice-versa. 14.
On the reverse page of personal bonds, the aƩesƟng officer shall menƟon the permanent address of the peƟƟoner along with the phone number linked with the AADHAR card, the other phone numbers (if any), and e-mail (if any). In case of any change in the above parƟculars, the peƟƟoner shall immediately and not later than 30 days from such modificaƟon, inƟmate about the change to the concerned Police StaƟon and the concerned Court.
15. The peƟƟoner to also execute a bond for aƩendance in the concerned Court(s), as and when asked to do so. The presentaƟon of the personal bond shall be deemed acceptance of the following and all other sƟpulaƟons, terms, and condiƟons of this bail order.
16.
The peƟƟoner shall be in deemed custody for SecƟon 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The peƟƟoner shall join the invesƟgaƟon as and when called by the InvesƟgaƟng Officer or any Superior Officer; and shall cooperate with the invesƟgaƟon at all further stages as might be required. In the event of failure to do so, it will be open for the prosecuƟon to seek cancellaƟon of the bail. Whenever the invesƟgaƟon occurs within the police premises, the peƟƟoner shall not be called before 8 AM and shall be let off before 6 PM, and shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.
17.
The peƟƟoner shall not influence, browbeat, pressurize, make any inducement, threat, or promise, directly or indirectly, to the witnesses, the Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and the circumstances of the case, to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police, or the Court, or to tamper with the evidence.
18.
Given the nature of allegaƟons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the peƟƟoner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, ammuniƟon, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within ten days of release from prison and inform the InvesƟgator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the peƟƟoner shall be enƟtled to renew and take it back in case of acquiƩal in this case.
19.
Within ten days of release from prison, the peƟƟoner shall forward to the InvesƟgator/SHO and the complainant/vicƟm(s) the complete details of bank account numbers with addresses, fixed deposits, DEMAT account numbers, the current market value of jewellery, sovereign metals, all precious arƟcles, held either individually or jointly, and cash-in-hand.
20.
During the trial's pendency, if the peƟƟoner repeats or commits any offence where the sentence prescribed is more than seven years or violates any condiƟon as sƟpulated in this order, it shall always be permissible to the respondent to apply for cancellaƟon of this bail. It shall further be open for any invesƟgaƟng agency to bring it to the noƟce of the Court seized of the subsequent applicaƟon that the accused was earlier cauƟoned not to indulge in criminal acƟviƟes. Otherwise, the bail bonds shall conƟnue to remain in force throughout the trial and aŌer that in terms of SecƟon 437-A of the Cr.P.C.
21.
Any Advocate for the peƟƟoner and the Officer in whose presence the peƟƟoner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all condiƟons of this bail order in any language that the peƟƟoner understands.
22.
If the peƟƟoner finds bond amount beyond social and financial reach, it may be brought to the noƟce of this Court for appropriate reducƟon. Further, if the peƟƟoner finds bail condiƟon(s) as violaƟng fundamental, human, or other rights, or causing difficulty due to any situaƟon, then for modificaƟon of such term(s), the peƟƟoner may file a reasoned applicaƟon before this Court, and aŌer taking cognizance, even to the Court taking cognizance or the trial Court, as the case may be, and such Court shall also be competent to modify or delete any condiƟon.
23. This order does not, in any manner, limit or restrict the rights of the Police or the invesƟgaƟng agency from further invesƟgaƟon as per law. 24.
In case the InvesƟgator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police StaƟon arraigns another secƟon of any penal offence in this FIR, and if the new secƟon prescribes maximum sentence which is not greater than the secƟons menƟoned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added secƟon(s). However, suppose the newly inserted secƟons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the secƟons menƟoned above, then, in that case, the InvesƟgator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the peƟƟoner noƟce of a minimum of seven days providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.
25. Any observaƟon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 26.
In return for the protecƟon from incarceraƟon, the Court believes that the accused shall also reciprocate through desirable behavior. 27.
The SHO of the concerned police staƟon or the invesƟgaƟng officer shall arrange to send a copy of this order, preferably a soŌ copy, to the complainant and the vicƟm, within two days. If the vicƟm(s) noƟce any violaƟon of this order, they may inform the SHO of the concerned police staƟon, the trial court, or even this court. 28.
There would be no need for a cerƟfied copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the PeƟƟoner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aƩest it to be a true copy. In case the aƩesƟng officer wants to verify the authenƟcity, such an officer can also verify its authenƟcity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aƩesƟng bonds. PeƟƟon allowed in aforesaid terms. All pending applicaƟons, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 11.05.2023 JyoƟ-II Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes Whether reportable :
No