High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32749/2025dismissed

Nar Singh v. State Of Haryana

2025-09-25Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi12 pages

!"# $%&%!'( ) )

)) %%!' + , +&-& * ))) &.!'# '

( /0 )*

* *

#### * *

1) $ %&'( ')'*

+ "

,-.

') '%/)')'% 0/1/'23'41 /%)3*41*)&3'4 (

2125 6 3 0/3'4 ( ')'*

/*3/43(4 6

0/ ( " 4

" 6 (

' $ ,-.

! +

1 .

5 7Sir, it is requested that I, Aman son of Sh. Ramkesh am the resident of Litani, Uklana. Alongwith agriculture, also do private work. On 10.10.2024, I was going from my house in my I%20 car having temporary number towards our petrol pump. About 1/2 KM behind my pump, a vehicle of CIA%II Staff, Hissar stopped in front of my car. They came down from the car and came near car and asked me to come out of

the car. When I asked as to who are you. They told me as CIA staff and made, me to come out of the car and sit on the rear seat of my car and they took me to Litani Mor in my car and after parking the car on the side, made me to come out of the car and sit in the staff car and my car was taken away by 2 employees of CIA%II staff Hissar. In staff car, there were also 2 staff employees. They took me to Mela Kothi, CIA%II, Hisar. Thereafter, they made me to sit for 1%1 1⁄2 hours and thereafter 2 employees, who were from CIA%II, brought my car in CIA%II. They interrogated me and said that a case would be registered against you in the matter of Raja Gujjar and Vikram Ladwa and implicate your name in illegal weapons and illegal possession and by registering the case against you, would get your property attached. I told about my innocence.

Then they removed my clothes and tied me with the chair and threatened and scared me. The staff members were talking with each other with the name of Ajay and Kapil Sihag. I can identify those four persons upon producing before me. Thereafter I was taken to the Incharge Inspector. Then Inspector told about implicating in the case of Raja Gujjar and said that a property of ten crores has been taken and pump has also been taken. Thereafter, I was made to sit in a room and after sometime Richhpal and Ramesh Dhaka came. They came to me and asked to get me released by giving bribe. Then I asked my uncle Richhpal and Ramesh Dhaka for resolving this by giving bribe so that the reputation may not be tarnished. Thereafter 2%3 times, my uncle went in and came out. Then he told me that Kapil Sihag, CIA%II Incharge is demanding Rs. 30 lacs.

I said that I have not committed any murder, that I would give this much amount. Then my uncle and staff members finalized for releasing me for a sum of Rs.

threatened me to register false case, upon not giving the money. 6%7 days ago, Rs. 2 lacs were given to my uncle Richhpal, which my uncle gave by going inside CIA%II Hissar, in my presence. Now uncle Richhpal and Ramesh Dhaka are demanding another Rs.15 lacs 50 thousand. They are saying that we have made a commitment with Kapil Sihag, CIA%II. If you would not give the money, then my uncle Richhpal said that I would give. Now at the instance of both of them, I have made the arrangement of Rs.5 lacs 80 thousand. I would give this amount to Richhpal and Richhpal would give this amount to CIA%II Hissar, Incharge Kapil Sihag and his colleague staff. I do not want to give this amount of bribe to Richhpal and his accomplice Ramesh Dhaka. But they are repeatedly putting pressure on me for giving the money. I have the audio and video recording of Richhpal and his accomplice Ramesh Dhaka, which would be produce later on. Legal action be taken against all of them. Sd/ Aman son of Ramkesh, Village Litani, Tehsil Uklana XXXX."

* $

+ "

$ ! 5 .

*'/& "

( 5% 5'

.9&))))15 8 !

5 . !

" !

"! !!

" ///)')'% .')))))15 !

./9))))15 5

36 +"4 ! 6- 5--

, ! " ! . " ''/)')'%

! ./))))))15 5

- ! + :

/&* (

3(4 !"

"" ! $ !"

" "

"! !

" +"

6-5--

$ " " +" +

< $ !

8 "

+= "

> 6- 5--

" + 6- !

6 +"

> "

5 !

$ !"

5 " !

> "

" " 9

" ""

. 36 .4

> "

? !+" !+ @%00/)))9@

&&/%)//2'0 3 !+4 " +8 /)/)')'%

'%/)')'% = " 8 5 " " "" !! 8 6 +"

> !

//991 !+" !+ @%009&)@)/

@)9)@***** *@ A 8 -

> !

&'/1 !+" !+ @&/*%@&))& %* A 8 5B. - &2/1 !+" !+ &&/%)//''@ /'

6 +"

> !

@9*1 !+" !+ @&'&@0)**) % /*/)')'%

+ - " !

+" + !"

6- 5--

; ! 8" ;

!" !

" .

< 8

"" 8 - 6-

" 8 5 ! " !"

! /0% 6 6 "" ! 5

" " 8 +" + !

+ ;

" !

; ! 2 $ " "

+ "" !"

! "

+ ! ,-.

8 + 8 8

8 "

/)/)')'% $

+ "

/) ,-.

8 $ ! ! ! /&* ( ')'* 3/0% 664 8 !

!! !

8 ! "

+ " & B " "

" )&)2')'9

" " !" -

6 +"

- 34

+ !"

8 +

" 8 " 8 !

+ $ ! !"

/&* ( +" !

'%/)')'% 3; .5%4

8 !"

+ "

8 .

! $

" " +"

; ! !

! prima facie +"

" "

" =

+ "

+ " @ - " "

/) $

?+" ! 6

" !" +

= + " " +

+ "

" !

$ " ;

! +"85

7It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge%sheet has already been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation.

Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation, we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have granted discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. We are dealing with a matter wherein the original complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court to the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words, the complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised its discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the accused should be quashed and set aside. ! "

% "!

" !"" & # &!

"!"

"&"

% ! "

#$ #

)

"!"!

""( $("! ("

"&"

" # " !"% $" "$ # &""

& " "& ! "

#$"

"&" !# " "(

!"# !"

$"& "

& " $

! &

$!"

*& ! "

#$)

# ! !

"&" "( !!

" #

%# " (! !

& !!

"$ # &"

$""*

"$ # &

! "

#$ ) (

"& !" &! "

$!""$ !"

(! ! & !!

)

(

"( "(( !

"$ # $""*

" $"&

"&" !# " "(

& " "

!$ !"

"&"+"

% (!"

"&""

%# $(%!"# & " "& ! "

#$.

// - ,

-$ "( .#%/ 0$ 1

C+" ! 6 "

5 "21. The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence like corruption are required to be satisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution.

22. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) 7 Scale 15, wherein this Court expressed thus:

"28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of

securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt."

(Emphasis supplied)

23. The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be the sole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail. The presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused's liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice.

24. If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge%sheet is filed, the court may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant % accused of indulging in corruption.

25. Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it

suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: "Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long". In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France fell because there was corruption without indignation. Corruption has, in it, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or wrongs of a case but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish considerations.

26. If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements at the higher echelons of the Government and of the political parties."

/' - $& "( .#%/ +

C+" ! 6 "

79. It is well settled law, and reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devinder Kumar Bansal v. State of Punjab, 2025 INSC 320 that anticipatory bail in cases involving offences under the Corruption Act is to be granted only in the rarest of rare circumstances. The court is required to be prima facie satisfied either of false implication, political vendetta, or manifest frivolity in the complaint.

/* " " "

+ !

+ !"

> 6-5--

8 " 8 !

8 " !" $ + ! ,-. ! " ! ! /&* (

"! ! !"

+= " !

" +" !

'%/)')'% 3; .5%4 8 ! !

+ !

- " prima facie +"

" "

" = /% - 8

+ - ! $ ! !

8 + !

+ "

$ 6

+ " + " +

+ !

* *

) )

* 23 3 +&.

4%'56+ &!' #( &6!