CRM-M-2816-2025 -1- 207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2816-2025 Date of decision: 25.03.2025 EMMANUAL MASIH ALIAS NEELU ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) Pe11on for An1cipatory Bail under Sec1on 482 BNSS FIR No. Dated Police Staon Secons 295 26.12.2024 City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Secon 67(A) of Informaon Technology Act, 2000 1. The peoners apprehending arrest in the FIR caponed above has come up before this Court under Secon 482 of Bharaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking ancipatory bail. 2. As per paragraph 17 of the bail peon, the accused declares that two more case are pending against him and details of the same are as under:- Sr. No. FIR No. Date/Year Offenses Police Staon 1. 231 15.07.2023 420 IPC City Tarn Taran 2. 184 11.9.2024 406, 420, 120-B, 506 IPC City Tarn Taran 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the short reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: "That the true facts pertaining to the present case are that on Mandeep Kaur wife of Kuldeep Singh, resident of Noor Di Adda, Gali Renu Bala 2025.03.27 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2816-2025 -2- Sharmewali, Tarn Taran got recorded her statement before the invesgang officer to the effect that her marriage took place about 20 years ago with Kuldeep Singh son of Kehar Singh, resident of Noor Di Adda, Tarn Taran, according to religious customs. She has two children, her elder son Rajdeep Singh, age about 25 years, and her younger daughter Arshdeep Kaur, age about 22 years, both are married. Her husband Kuldeep Singh son of Kehar Singh, resident of Noor Di Adda, Tarn Taran had disagreements with her about 10 years ago, and now her husband is living with another woman. She is living with her children at her home. Her son's friend Samu Masih son of Gulfam Masih, resident of Purani Kachahri near Church, Tarn Taran, who used to frequently visit their house remained making relaons with her under the pretext of marriage and made relaons with her. In November 2024, while establishing illicit relaons with her, he recorded an obscene video, then Samu Masih started talking to her daughter Arshdeep Kaur's sister-in-law, Ginni wife of Gurmej Singh and formed a relaonship with her. When she objected to this, Samu Masih started threatening and blackmailing her. When this came to the noce of Ginni, she said that the obscene video which she has made of Mandeep Kaur, send it to her mobile as she wants to teach her a lesson by stopping her from talking to her. On this, Samu Masih sent the video made by him on 11.12.2024, at 09:51 AM, to Ginni's phone number 98556-11386, and Ginni and Samu Masih posted the video in other groups and made it viral and he made phone call to her and told her that the obscene video made by him has been made viral and now she can do whatever she wants to do and in this regard, the present case FIR No.295 dated 26.12.2024, under Secon 351(2) of BNS & 27(A) of the Informaon Technology Act was registered at Police Staon City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran against the peoner namely Samu Masih alisa Emmanual Masih as well as co-accused namely Ginni." 4. Peoner's counsle prays for bail by imposing any stringent condions and contends that pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoners and their family. He further submits that peoner already handover the mobile to the Invesgator and now nothing is required and recovered from the peoner. 5. State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that it has been yet to be verified that the peoner had tampered the mobile phone or in any way deleted the data from it. Counsel for the peoner submits that no such thing can be done and in case, it is found, he shall have no objecon if the State file an applicaon for cancellaon of bail. 6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the reply, which Renu Bala 2025.03.27 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2816-2025 -3- read as follows: "That as far as role of the peoner namely Emmanual Masih alias Samu Masih is concerned, it is submiIed that the firstly, the peoner has made obscene videos of the complainant and thereaJer, in order to take revenge of his insult done by the complainant, he has made the said obscene videos of the complainant viral which result into insulng of her modesty. Moreover, the CDR of the peoner clearly shows the involvement of the peoner in commiKng the above said offence in connivance with the co- accused. As such, the peoner has commiIed the serious offence and he is not entled for the concession of ancipatory bail and his custodial interrogaon is utmost required in the present case in order to recover his mobile phone and further to bring the invesgaon of the present case to its logical conclusion." REASONING: 7. Mobile phone which was used in crime already handover to Invesgator and no recovery is to be made from the peoner. Pre-trial incarceraon should not be a replica of post-convicon sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuon or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of ancipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jusfy custodial interrogaon or pre-trial incarceraon. 8. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability for custodial interrogaon or the pre-trial incarceraon at this stage. Without commenng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons menoned above, the peoner makes a case for bail. 9. Given above, provided the peoner is not required in any other case, the peoner shall be released on ancipatory bail in the FIR caponed above subject to furnishing bonds to the sasfacon of the Arresng Officer, and if the maIer is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sasfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 10. While furnishing a personal bond, the peoner shall menon the following personal idenficaon details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the aIesng officer/court considers it appropriate or Renu Bala 2025.03.27 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2816-2025 -4- considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 11. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 12. The pe oner is directed to join the inves ga on 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 Inves gator. The peoner shall be in deemed custody for Secon 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Secon 23 of BSA, 2023. The peoner shall join the invesgaon as and when called by the Invesgang Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the invesgaon at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecuon will be open to seeking cancellaon of the bail. During the invesgaon, the peoner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 13. The peoner shall abide by all statutory bond condions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The peoner 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. 14. In case the Invesgator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Staon arraigns another secon of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new secon prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the secons menoned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added secon(s). However, suppose the newly inserted secons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the secons menoned above; then, in that case, the Invesgator/Officer-In- Charge shall give the peoner noce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 15. This bail is condional, and the foundaonal condion is that if the peoner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applicaon for cancellaon of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 16. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17. A cerfied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Peoner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aIest it to be a true copy. If the aIesng officer wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aIesng bonds. Renu Bala 2025.03.27 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2816-2025 -5- 18. Peon allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. 25.03.2025 ( ANOOP CHITKARA) renubala JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Renu Bala 2025.03.27 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document