Gurpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 13.02.2025

Pronounced on: 19.02.2025 Gurpreet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate and Mr. H.S. Diwana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adesh Pal Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 05.12.2024 Kotwali, Bathinda 303 (2) of BNS, 2023 1.

The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.

2.

In paragraph 18 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3.

The facts and allegations are being taken from translated version of FIR, which reads as follows:

"Statement of Kalga Singh son of Pyara Singh son of Inder Singh resident of Balraj Nagar, Street N.6, Bathinda, aged about 60 years. Mobile no. 80546xxxxx. Stated that I am resident of above said address. I am doing transport work. I have total 6 canters and these are being run in Guru Nanak Canter Union, Hajirattan, Bathinda. On dated 03.12.2024 at 4 PM, I have parked my canter no. PB03BG7036 at Grain Market Bathinda. Some unknown person had stolen battery from the same. I have conducted enquiry at my own level, because earlier batteries of many vehicles have been stolen. Upon enquiry, we cam to know that the battery of my canter has been stolen by Hardeep Singh son of Dalvir Singh resident of Street No.13, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Opposite Green City Bathinda and Sonu son of Jagga Singh resident of Joganand.

The value of our stolen property is Rs. 7000/-. Today, I was coming to give information to you and you have met. Legal action may kindly be taken against Hardeep Singh son of Dalvir Singh resident of Street No.13, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Opposite Green City Bathinda and Sonu son of Jagga Singh resident of Joganand. I have recorded my statement, which has been read over and is correct."

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.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was named on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused and even batteries were recovered from him and in pursuance of order dated 30.12.2024, petitioner has joined the investigation. 6.

The State's counsel opposes bail, however does not dispute that the petitioner has joined investigation.

7.

Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pretrial incarceration. 8.

Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage.

9.

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.

10.

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 Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 11.

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) 12.

The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and

when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

13.

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 have the liberty to cancel this bail. 14.

It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 15.

The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above conditions and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law. 16.

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

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. 18.

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

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 19.02.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No.