Hari Om v. C.B.I.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 03.07.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:
Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
! "!
#
$ ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.
#"
!
%&'
! "!
#
"
( ) **+,*,%-***+
.+*,,*,%
#
#"!
/ #
-
.'001
,*.02 3 #
.,*$ !
- # # , 4#
# 1 ! 2 5
1
"6 #
#
2 !!
37$
!"#$!$!"%
P a g e | 2
% &
'() (
(*&
'() + , +- #$ ./!./0"$!" - & & %
% 1 & 2
3%4% % %'()+ 3 % ) 1 -()+ 5 4!$!" 44 4
%
% #$ & -
1 -() ) + %
-6
,4&1!$!71% % %'()1+ 3 -() ) ' !0$$$8
3
%
9
-() ) %&4 2
1 & ) '!0$$$8
-6
-()) '!0$$$8 : 4
-()) %
- '() ;<&-()6 -()
& % '() - (
#$$& -()) 44
'!0$$$8
3
% & 44
1: 2 -())
= 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the 1 ! 2 in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further iterated that the petitioner had no occasion to deal with the work in question for which
P a g e | 3 bribe money was allegedly given. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner was posted at Passport Seva Kendra and not at the main office where the work in question was required to be taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner is suffering from chronic Renal failure Stage V and is awaiting kidney transplantation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that two co-accused in the RC in question, who had actually received the money, namely, Anup Singh and Sanjay Kumar Srivastava have been extended the concession of regular bail vide order dated 09.12.2025 passed by this Court in CRM-M-39015-2024 and CRM-M40849-2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner was earlier extended the concession of interim bail on the medical grounds on 26.04.2024, which has been extended from time to time. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.
4.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-CBI has opposed the plea for grant of regular bail by raising submissions in tandem with the reply dated 22.04.2024 filed by the respondent-CBI. Learned counsel has further argued that, in case the petitioner is released on bail, he might abscond from the process of justice. 5.
I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.
6.
The petitioner was arrested on 16.02.2024 & thereafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 28.03.2024. It is not in dispute that wherein total 32 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which 2 only have been examined till date. It is, thus, indubitable
P a g e | 4 that conclusion of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised by the counsel give rise to the debatable issues which are essentially required to be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the rights of either of the parties. )
#
"!
# "
" # 3
# !8 !#
#
"
#
9
3 # #
48
#
# $ # "
#
!"!
*'.,,*,+ CRM-M-39015-2024 and CRM-M40849-2024 as well as the absence of any material to indicate that the petitioner has ever misused the concession of interim regular bail extended to him on medical grounds since April, 2024 which is enuring till date, this court finds the petitioner to be entitled for enlargement on bail. Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioner in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7.
Ergo, the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned concerned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial Court.
P a g e | 5 (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.
(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.
8.
In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
9.
Ordered accordingly.
10.
Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
11.
Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 03, 2025 Naveen Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No
P a g e | 6