Deepak Kumar Alias Deep Lot v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 02.12.2024

Pronounced on: 19.12. 2024 Deepak Kumar @ Deep Lot

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Mohan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

Mr. Bhanu Pratap, Advocate and Mr. Kamal Nagpal, Advocate, for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 22.12.2023 Nissing, District 148,149,308,323,324,379-B, Karnal 427, 452, 506 IPC 1.

The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.

2.

Per paragraph 16 of the bail application and the reply, the accused has the following criminal antecedents:

Sr. No.

FIR No.

Date Offenses Police Station 1.

16.10.2023 323, 325,506 IPC Nissing, Karnal 2.

19.10.2023 323, 506, 34 IPC Nissing Karnal 3.

The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:

"1. That it is submitted that a complaint was submitted in the Police Station Nissing, Karnal by Rampal S/o Datu Ram resident of Nissing along with MLR No. GK/NSG/2023/62 dated 21.12.2023 of Sonu S/o Bira Ram resident of Nissing and ML.R No. GK/NNS/2023/63 dated 21.12.2023 of Rahul S/o Surinder resident of Gonder mentioning therein that he was present at Gallarpur Raod Power Zone Gym with his nephew. At that time Deepak Lot S/o Suresh, Sethi, Ajay son of Sham Lal, Aryan S/o Mahinder, Rocky, Ravi who were all armed with gandasi, swords, pharsas and followed by 26/27 boys armed with weapons came inside the gym and Rohit @ Rohta, Sethi, Deepak, Kalu, Chanderkant attacked Sonu

with sharp-edged weapons with the intention to kill him while Ravi, Ajay, Rocky, Aryan attacked Rahul with sharp-edged weapons. Deepak Lot was carrying a pistol on his waist. Thereafter, on raising of lalkara by Rohit @ Rohtas and Deepak Lot the other boys, some of whom had covered their faces, destroyed the Gym and snatched cash amount Rs.50,800/-, CCTV and DVR. Sethi, Aryan, Sahil Singha, Sethi's brother-in-law from Gharaunda and others are participants in the incident of destruction of property, dacoity and criminal intimidation. Certain other persons who were using the Gym, their mobile phones were also snatched by Rocky and other boys. Deepak Lot and others raised lalkara and threatened that in case any person dares to be a witness or tries to help the complainant party, then they will not spare him.

While going away, the accused stated that they had merely made the complainant party understand and if they still continue to run the Gym without accompanying the accused, then they would lost their lives. Aryan and others damaged all the bikes standing outside the Gym with their weapons and by displaying weapons in open went away. Out of them most of accused are of Balmiki Basti Nissing. The complainant knows them personally and they all have past criminal record and also enjoy political patronage. Previously also, they had threatened them to close the Gym regarding which he had also moved an application. On the basis of the statement of the complainant FIR no.406 dated 22.12.2023 U/s 148,149,308,323,324,379-B,427,452,506 IPC was registered in Police Station Nissing Karnal (Annexure P-1).

3. That co-accused Deepak @ Challu, Vikash @ Bashi, Sahil @ Singha, Pankau @ Sethi, Ajay S/o Rameshwar and Pardeep @ Kalu were also arrested on 05.01.2024. During the course of investigation, all the above mentioned accused suffered their disclosure statement vide which they amitted the commission of crime of the present case and in pursuance of the same, they got recovered money and weapon used in the offence from the disclosed places. The co-accused Deepak @ Challu in pursuance of his disclosure statement got recovered Rs.400/- and sword from the iron almirah of room of his house."

4.

The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family.

5.

The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 6.

It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:

"2. That it is submitted that after the registration of the FIR Investigating Officer inspected the place of occurrence and recovered the damaged motor cycle bearing registration no. HR-05-BJ-6308 make Splendor. On 30.12.2023 co-accused Rohit @ Rohta was arrested and he suffered his disclosure statement vide which he admitted the commission of crime of present case and stated that he along with co-accused Vikas @ Bashi and others in furtherance of their common object of unlawful assembly committed the occurrence of the present case and he can get recover Rs.400/- and Takwa from the bed of the room of his house. In pursuance of the above disclosure statement he got recovered Rs.400/- and sharp edged takwa from the disclosed place. On 05.01.2024 petitioneraccused Deepak Kumar @ Deep Lot was arrested and he suffered his disclosure statement vide which he admitted the commission of crime of present case and stated that he along with co-accused Vikas @ Bashi and others in furtherance of their common object of unlawful assembly

committed the occurrence of the present case and stated that" on 19-122023, at night at 8:30 PM, when many boys were doing gym, we forcefully entered the gym and attacked the gym operators Sonu S/o Bira Ram R/o Nissing and Rahul S/o Surinder, resident of Gondar, and inflicted fatal injuries on them, I was having a sword in my hand and inflicted blows on the back of Sonu and we all inflicted injuries to Rahul and We broke all the articles of the Gym and also damaged the motor cycles parked outside the Gym. We looted 50,800/- from the Gym kept in the gym counter and looted valuables like supplement boxes were looted. When we came to know that CCTV cameras installed inside and outside the gym recorded the incident then our companions looted the DVR of the CCTV camera kept in the cabin of the gym and ran away.

After the occurrence, we all gathered near my house and divided the cash of Rs 50,800/- which was looted from the gym among ourselves. He can get recover Rs.800/- and Sword from the Almirah of the room of his house (Annexure R-1). In pursuance of the above disclosure statement he got recovered Rs.800/- and Sword from the disclosed place (Annexure R-2).

3. That co-accused Deepak @ Challu, Vikash @ Bashi, Sahil @Singha, Pankau @ Sethi, Ajay S/o Rameshwar and Pardeep @ Kalu were also arrested on 05.01.2024. During the course of investigation, all the above mentioned accused suffered their disclosure statement vide which they amitted the commission of crime of the present case and in pursuance of the same, they got recovered money and weapon used in the offence from the disclosed places. The co-accused Deepak @ Challu in pursuance of his disclosure statement got recovered Rs.400/- and sword from the iron almirah of room of his house."

7.

There is sufficient prima-facie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing.

8.

Per paragraph 15 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since 05.01.2024 Per the custody certificate dated 14.10.2024, the petitioner's is in custody since 06.01.2024.

9.

Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the prima-facie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability further pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 10.

Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

11.

Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

12.

While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

1.

AADHAR number 2.

Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

3.

Mobile number (If available) 4.

E-Mail id (If available) 13.

This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms. 14.

The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

15.

Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim until the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigation, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. 16.

Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the victim, and their family members, as well as the members of society, and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction].

Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days from release from prison and inform the Investigator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and take it back in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the offense. 17.

The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform

and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petition (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 conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed."

18.

This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 19.

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 20.

A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, 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. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 21.

Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 19.12 2024 smriri Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No.