Daljit Singh v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27388-2023 Date of Decision: 05.09.2023 Daljit Singh ...PeƟƟoner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Yashjot Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the peƟƟoner.
Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police StaƟon SecƟons 17.01.2023 Vigilance Bureay, 13(a) read with SecƟon 13(2) FS-1, Punjab at of PrevenƟon of CorrupƟon Mohali Act and 409, 420, 120-B IPC 1.
The peƟƟoner incarcerated in the FIR capƟoned above has come up before this Court under SecƟon 439 CrPC seeking bail.
2.
In paragraph 14 of the bail peƟƟon, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3.
On 03.07.2023, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the State to file an affidavit with regard to involvement of peƟƟoner and also detail of all his assets at the Ɵme of joining the service as well as current status. 4.
Short reply by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Unit, SAS Nagar filed by State counsel today in the Court is taken on record. In para 8 of reply dated 5.09.2023, details of property of the peƟƟoner has been menƟoned.
5.
Counsel for the peƟƟƟoner submits that the peƟƟoner is in custody since 10.04.2023 and further pre-trial incarceraƟon would cause an irreversible injusƟce to the peƟƟoner and family.
REASONING:
6.
As per paragraph 10 of the bail peƟƟon, the peƟƟoner is in custody since 10.04.2023. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaƟons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusƟfiability further pre-trial incarceraƟon at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and condiƟons menƟoned in this order. 7.
In Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of InvesƟgaƟon, (2012) 1 SCC 40, Supreme Court holds, [28] We are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged with economic offences of huge magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardize the economy of the country. At the same Ɵme, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the invesƟgaƟng agency has already completed invesƟgaƟon and the charge sheet is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further invesƟgaƟon. We are of the view that the appellants are enƟtled to the grant of bail pending trial on stringent condiƟons in order to ally the apprehension expressed by CBI.
8.
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 v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020:INSC:106 [Para 92], (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the ConsƟtuƟonal Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restricƟve condiƟons.
9.
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. 10.
In Madhu Tanwar v. State of Punjab, 2023:PHHC:077618 [Para 10, 21], CRM-M27097-2023, decided on 29-05-2023, this court observed, [10] The exponenƟal growth in technology and arƟficial intelligence has transformed idenƟficaƟon techniques remarkably. Voice, gait, and facial recogniƟon are incredibly sophisƟcated and pervasive. ImpersonaƟon, as we know it
tradiƟonally, has virtually become impossible. Thus, the remedy lies that whenever a judge or an officer believes that the accused might be a flight risk or has a history of fleeing from jusƟce, then in such cases, appropriate condiƟons can be inserted that all the expenditure that shall be incurred to trace them, shall be recovered from such person, and the State shall have a lien over their assets to make good the loss. [21] In this era when the knowledge revoluƟon has just begun, to keep pace with exponenƟal and unimaginable changes the technology has brought to human lives, it is only fiƫng that the dependence of the accused on surety is minimized by giving alternaƟve opƟons. Furthermore, there should be no insistence to provide permanent addresses when people either do not have permanent abodes or intend to re-locate. 11.
Given above, provided the peƟƟoner is not required in any other case, the peƟƟoner shall be released on bail in the FIR capƟoned above, in the following terms: (a). PeƟƟoner to furnish personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/); AND (b) To give one surety of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/-), to the saƟsfacƟon of the concerned court, and in case of non-availability, to any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepƟng the surety, the concerned court must saƟsfy that if the accused fails to appear in court, then such surety can produce the accused before the court. OR (b). PeƟƟoner to hand over to the concerned court a fixed deposit for Rs.
Ten thousand only (INR 10,000/-), with the clause of automaƟc renewal of the principal and the interest reverƟng to the linked account, made in favor of the 'Chief Judicial Magistrate' of the concerned district, or blocking the aforesaid amount in favour of the concerned 'Chief Judicial Magistrate'. Said fixed deposit or blocking funds can be from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 50% or from any of the well-established and stable private sector banks. In case the bankers are not willing to make a Fixed Deposit in such eventuality it shall be permissible for the peƟƟoner to prepare an account payee demand draŌ favouring concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for the similar amount. (c).
Such court shall have a lien over the funds unƟl the case's closure or discharged by subsƟtuƟon, or up to the expiry of the period menƟoned under S. 437-A CrPC, 1973, and at that stage, 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.
(d). The peƟƟoner is 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 declaraƟons made in the bail peƟƟon and all other sƟpulaƟons, terms, and condiƟons of secƟon 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and of this bail order.
(e). While furnishing personal bond, the peƟƟoners/applicants shall menƟon the following personal idenƟficaƟon details: 1.
AADHAR number 2.
Passport number, (If available), when the court aƩesƟng the bonds thinks appropriate or considers the accused as a flight risk.
3.
Mobile number (If available) 4.
E-Mail id (If available) 12.
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.
13.
PeƟƟoner to comply with their undertaking made in the bail peƟƟon, made before this court through counsel as reflected at the beginning of this order or in earlier orders. If the peƟƟoner fails to comply with any of such undertakings, then on this ground alone, the bail might be canceled, and the vicƟm/complainant may file any such applicaƟon for the cancellaƟon of bail, and the State shall file the said applicaƟon. 14.
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 remain in force throughout the trial and aŌer that in SecƟon 437-A of the Cr.P.C., if not canceled due to non-appearance or breach of condiƟons.
15.
The condiƟons menƟoned above imposed by this Court are to endeavour that the accused tries to reform, does not repeat the offence and to provide an opportunity to the vicƟm to consider legal remedies for recovery of the amount. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ PeƟƟon (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 condiƟons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proporƟonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts while imposing bail condiƟons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condiƟons that would result in the deprivaƟon of rights and liberƟes must be eschewed." In Mohammed Zubair v.
State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ PeƟƟon (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 condiƟons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proporƟonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts while imposing bail condiƟons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condiƟons that would result in the deprivaƟon of rights and liberƟes must be eschewed." 16.
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.
17.
If the peƟƟoner finds the 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.
18. 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. 19.
In return for the protecƟon from incarceraƟon, the Court believes that the accused shall also reciprocate through desirable behavior. 20.
It is clarified that in case, State finds the peƟƟoner has concealed any assets, then on this ground alone, it shall be permissible for the State to file an applicaƟon for cancellaƟon of bail.
21.
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 05.09.2023 JyoƟ-II Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes Whether reportable:
No.