Harpreet Singh @ Kaler v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M- 33316-2023
Reserved on: 02.08.2023
Pronounced on: 09.08.2023 Harpreet Singh @ Kaler ...PeƟƟoner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Ranbir Singh Sekhon, Advocate for the peƟƟoner. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police StaƟon SecƟons 17.12.2021 STF, STF Wing, SAS 22-C, 25, 29 of NDPS Act Nagar, Mohali 1.
The peƟƟoner incarcerated for violaƟng the above-menƟoned provisions of NarcoƟcs Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) per the FIR capƟoned above, on the allegaƟons of possession of commercial quanƟty, has come up before this Court under SecƟon 439 CrPC seeking bail.
2.
In paragraph 22 of the bail peƟƟon, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3.
PeƟƟoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condiƟons and is also voluntarily agreeable to the condiƟon that Ɵll the conclusion of the trial before the trial court, the peƟƟoner shall keep only one mobile number, which is menƟoned in AADHAR card, and within fiŌeen days of release from prison undertakes to disconnect all other mobile numbers. The peƟƟoner contends that the further pre-trial incarceraƟon would cause an irreversible injusƟce to the peƟƟoner and family. 4.
While opposing the bail, the contenƟon on behalf of the State is that the quanƟty of contraband involved in the case falls in the commercial category. REASONING:
5. The allegaƟons are that one Suresh Kumar was apprehended by SI Harpal Singh on the
basis of secret informaƟon and recovered 52000 tablets of TRAMWELL-SR from the dicky of the swiŌ car. The present peƟƟoner was nominated in disclosure statement, since other co accused has been granted bail by co ordinate bench of this court, the present peƟƟoner deserves concession of bail .
6.
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. 7.
In Madhu Tanwar and Anr. v. State of Punjab, 2023:PHHC:077618 [Para 10, 21], CRM-M-27097-2023, 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. 8.
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 favoring concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for a 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 of an Indian ciƟzen, (If available), when the aƩesƟng officer/court deems appropriate or considers the accused as a flight risk.
3.
Mobile number (If available) 4.
E-Mail id (If available) 9.
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.
10. PeƟƟoner is further directed to comply with their undertaking as reflected in the
beginning of this order and also directed not to obtain more than one mobile number Ɵll the conclusion of trial; however, this restricƟon is only on pre-paid SIMs [mobile numbers] and not on post-paid connecƟons. If the peƟƟoners fail to comply with any of these condiƟons, then on this ground alone, the bail might be canceled, and the State shall file applicaƟon for the cancellaƟon of bail. 11.
Given the nature of the 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 fiŌeen days from 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, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. 12.
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.
13.
The condiƟons menƟoned above imposed by this court are to endeavour to reform and the accused does not repeat the offence, and also to bock the menace of drugs abuse. 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 ThreeJudge 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."
14.
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.
15.
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.
16. 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. 17.
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.
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.
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 09.08.2023 JyoƟ-II Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes Whether reportable:
No.