Dalip Kumar @ Dilip Bansal v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision:01.07.2022 Dalip Kumar @ Dilip Bansal

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rajat Gautam, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. S.P. Arora, Advocate and Mr. Himanshu, Advocate for the complainant **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 07.03.2021 Rohtak City, District Rohtak 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC, 1860 (Sections 467/468/471 IPC were deleted later on) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR as mentioned above and all the consequential proceedings arising thereto including the Order dated 07.01.2022 passed by Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak vide which the petitioner has been declared proclaimed person under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. 1973 (Annexure P-7) and challan (Final Report) under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner under Sections 420/120-B IPC (Annexure P-10). 2.

The accused could not be served through the ordinary process, including summons, bailable warrants, and even non-bailable warrants. The concerned court finally proceeded against the petitioner under section 82 of CrPC and declared the petitioner a proclaimed offender vide order dated 07-01-2022, passed by Ld. CJM, Rohtak.

3.

After arguing for considerable time, ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal justice system must not hamper and suffer because of the petitioner. Thus, would confine the prayers in the petition to grant of bail on the petitioner's

surrendering before the majesty of the concerned court, and reserving liberty to raise the given-up relief in the subsequent petition(s), if the need so arises. 4.

Ld. counsel appearing for the State has strenuously opposed this petition, including the limited relief as confined by the petitioner. 5.

Given above, this court is confining the adjudication of this matter to the extent mentioned herein before, reserving the liberty to the petitioner as prayed. 6.

In petition, the petitioner offers detailed explanation for non-appearance by stating that on one day the court holiday was declared and after that it was miscommunication and misunderstanding, which led to non-appearance. 7.

The primary object of service is to secure the accused's presence in trial. The petitioner has approached this court on its own, which establishes the bonafide at this stage. Without adjudicating the explanation offered and stand taken by the petitioner, this court, in the exercise of its inherent powers under section 482 CrPC, deems it appropriate to grant the following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions mentioned in this order. 8.

The possibility of the accused henceforth not attending the trial, and the likelihood of fleeing justice, can be taken care of by imposing elaborative and stringent conditions. 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.

9.

Without commenting on the case's merits, and in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and also for the reasons mentioned above, the ends of justice would meet with the following order.

10.

The petitioner shall surrender before the concerned court within ten days from today. On appearance, the concerned court shall release the petitioner on bail on the same day, subject to furnishing bail bonds to its satisfaction and imposing additional conditions, as it may deem appropriate in the background of the accused's conduct. 11.

The petitioner to execute a bond for attendance in the concerned court.On the reverse page of personal bonds, the petitioner shall mention the permanent address, 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 particulars, the petitioner shall immediately and not later than 30 days from such modification, intimate about the change to the concerned Police Station and the concerned Court.

12.

There shall be a stay of the petitioner's arrest in the case mentioned above for ten days, i.e., till 11 July 2022; however, if the petitioner fails to appear within the time stipulated above, then stay on arrest shall stand vacated without any further reference to this court. It is clarified that if the petitioner appears before the concerned court, then all warrants issued by the concerned court against the petitioner, in the matter mentioned above shall stand recalled and canceled. It is clarified that if the petitioner fails to appear before the concerned court within above mentioned time limit, then this order shall stand recalled automatically under section 362 read with 482 CrPC, without any furtherance reference to this court. 13.

Within ten days from today,i.e., till 11 July 2022, the petitioner shall procure a smartphone and inform its IMEI number and other details to the SHO/I.O. of the Police station mentioned before. The petitioner shall always keep the phone location/GPS on the "ON" mode. Whenever the Investigating officer asks to share the location, the petitioner shall immediately do so. The petitioner shall neither clear the location history, WhatsApp chats, calls nor format the phone without permission of the concerned SHO/I.O. This condition shall continue till the completion of the trial or closure of case, whatever is earlier.

14.

Within ten days from today, i.e., till 11 July 2022, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of rupees ten thousand in 'High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund,' Account number 65018692589, IFSC code SBIN0050306, Branch Code 50306, Brach Address State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Sector 1, Chandigarh. After depositing, the petitioner shall file the proof of deposit, before the concerned court and send its copy alongwith a copy of this order to the Secretary, Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association, either in physical or electronic mode.

15.

Any Advocate for the petitioner and the Officer in whose presence the petitioner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all conditions of this bail order in any language that the petitioner understands.

16. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17.

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, 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. In case the attesting officer wants to verify the authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

Petition partly allowed to the extent mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 01.07.2022 sonia arora Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.