CRM-M-11564-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11564-2025 Reserved on: 01.09.2025 Pronounced on: 12.09.2025 Sonu @ Vicky ...Peoner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Sauhard Singh, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Atul Gaur, A.A.G, Haryana. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 169 29.04.2024 Central Faridabad, District Faridabad (Haryana) 186, 353, 307, 34, 120-B IPC and 25 of Arms Act 1. The peoner incarcerated in the FIR caponed above came before this Court under Secon 483 of Bharaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail. 2. As per paragraph 14 of the bail applicaon and the status report, the peoner has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Date Offenses Police Sta0on 1. 554 2015 25/54/59 of Arms Act City Bahadurgarh, Jha- jjar 2. 317 2016 379 A, 392, 201, 34 IPC and 25/54/59 of Arms Act Shivaji Colony, Rohtak 3. 179 2019 148, 149, 341, 427, 506 IPC Shivaji Colony, Rohtak 4. 77 27.01.2022 148, 149, 323, 452, 392, 379-B IPC & 25/54/59 of Arms Act Shivaji Colony, Rohtak 5. 232 2023 25/54/59 of Arms act Special Cell, Delhi 6. 268 23.08.2023 302, 307, 148, 149, 201, 216, 120-B IPC & 25/54/59 of Arms Act Beri Jhajjar 7. 212 2024 387 IPC Bharat Nagar, West Delhi 8. 150 2024 25 of Arms Act Special Cell, New Delhi 9. 142 2024 385, 387, 120 B IPC Maurya Enclave, North West Delhi 1 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: 11. That allegaons in the present case are that, in furtherance of the crime and patrol duty necessary arrangements were made and District Courts Faridabad was put under surveillance by the police team. At about 11:30 a.m. on the said date, a Scorpio car bearing registraon No. DL8CAC3952 was found near District Courts, which stopped as well in front of SI Parveen Yadav and his Team. A boy got down from that car and started walking, who was idenfied by the secret informant, to be the wanted criminal Dinesh of Village Ritholi Haryana. Secret informer was sent away and co-accused Dinesh was signaled to be apprehended and, nabbed by the police, who was asked to show his I-Card but instead of doing so, he shouted at his companions si3ng in the car 'police-police' and asked Golu to run the car over the Police Team, who was approaching them from the front as well and the car was tried to be run over SI Vijender Diwach, HC Manish and Constable Parveen with intenon to kill them but they had a miraculous escape and the driver of the Scorpio car, while causing damage to other cars parked nearby, absconded, while co- accused Dinesh was apprehended at the spot, was arrested in the present case, on being found in conscious possession of one pistol and four live cartridges. 4. The peoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condions and contends that further pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoner and their family. 5. The peoner’s counsel submits that the peoner would have no objecon whatsoever to any stringent condions that this Court may impose, including that if the peoner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State may file an applicaon to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdicon over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and may do so at their discreon, to which the peoner shall have no objecon. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to para 14 of the status report, which read as follows: “14. That in the present case, car was tried to be run over SI Vijender Diwach, HC Manish and Constable Parveen with intenon to kill them by 2 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 the accused persons but they had a miraculous escape and the driver of the Scorpio car, while causing damage to other cars parked nearby, absconded, while co-accused Dinesh was apprehended at the spot. Hence, none of the police official had received any injury, therefore, neither medico-legal examinaon of any police official was got conducted nor any of the police official remained admi<ed in any hospital. No injury has been a<ributed to the peoner. On the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Golu @ Bijender (Annexure P-3), peoner/accused was, arrested in the present case. Since, the offence under Secon 307 IPC is a<racted in the present case.” REASONING: 7. It Shall be appropriate to refer to paragraph 12 of the reply, which reads as follows: “12. That role of the peoner/accused is that, he acvely parcipated in the commission of offence. He was very much present at the spot. On 12.09.2024 peoner/accused was arrested in pursuance of disclosure statement of co-accused Golu @Bijender. He was already in custody in some other case and producon warrants were issued against him. In pursuance of disclosure statement of peoner/accused, countrymade pistol was also got recovered by him which further proves his involvement in the commission of offence. Peoner/accused is a habitual offender as ten more criminal cases are already registered against him, out of which in one criminal case secon 302 IPC is also a<racted. Peoner/accused is a member of Bhahu gang and said gang is indulged in commission of many heinous crimes. There are serious allegaons against the peoner/accused.” 8. The peoner has a massive criminal antecedents and as per the invesgaon carried out ll date, he appears to be a member of gangster group. However, the counsel for the peoner, on instrucons, has undertaken that without conceding and admiHng the peoners will reform and live like a decent human being and would not repeat the offence. This considering the peoner’s criminal antecedents coupled with the assurance made by the peoner counsel that in case the peoner repeats the offence, he shall have no objecon if not only this bill is cancelled but also the bails granted earlier are also cancelled. This Court is of the opinion that one more opportunity and rather final opportunity can be given to the peoner to mend his ways and to course correct. 3 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 9. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecng the peoner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceraon should not be a replica of post-convicon sentencing. 10. Per paragraph 12 of the bail peon, the peoner has been in custody since 12.09.2024 Per the custody cerficate dated 28.08.2025, the peoner’s total custody in this FIR is 11 months and 17 days. 11. The law of bail, like any other branch of law, has its own philosophy, and occupies an important place in the administraon of jusce and the concept of bail emerges from the conflict between the police power to restrict liberty of a man who is alleged to have commiKed a crime, and presumpon of innocence in favour of the alleged criminal.1In deciding bail applicaons an important factor which should certainly be taken into consideraon by the Court is the delay in concluding the trial.—OMen this takes several years, and if the accused is denied bail but is ulmately acquiKed, who will restore so many years of his life spent in custody? —Is Arcle 21 of the Constuon, which is the most basic of all the fundamental rights in our Constuon, not violated in such a case? —Of course this is not the only factor, but it is certainly one of the important factors in deciding whether to grant bail.2 Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperave according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.3 Personal liberty deprived when bail is refused, is too precious a value of our constuonal system recognised under Art. 21 that the curial power to negate it is a great trust exercisable, not casually, but judicially with lively concern for the cost to the individual and the community.4 When the undertrial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, Arcle 21 of the Constuon is violated.5 12. Given the peoner’s custody, even the past criminal antecedents will not come in the peoner’s way of geHng out on bail. 13. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability further pre-trial incarceraon at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and condions menoned in this order. 1 Supreme Court of India in Vaman Narain Ghiya v. state of Rajasthan, [E-SCR] ; [2008] 17 SCR 369, Para 16, decided on 12.12.2008. 2Supreme Court of India in State of Kerala v. Raneef, SC 2J [E-SCR]; [2011] 1 SCR 590, Para 4, decided on 03.01.2011. 3 Supreme Court of India in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, SC 2J [E-SCR], Paragraph 127, decided on 02.12.2010. 4 Supreme Court of India in Babu Singh & ors v. State of UP, [E-SCR] P. 777, decided on 31.01.1978. 5 Supreme Court of India in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI , [2011] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 309, Para 26, [E-SCR], decided on 23.11.2011. 4 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 14. The invesgaon indicates that the peoner is not the main accused, so the peoner's bail shall not be treated as a precedent for granng bail to the other co- accused with a higher role. 15. 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. 16. Given the above, provided the peoner is not required in any other case, the peoner shall be released on bail in the FIR caponed above, subject to furnishing bonds to the sasfacon of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate or duty Magistrate, with or without surees, with a maximum bond amount not to exceed INR 10,000. 17. Before accepng the surety, the concerned Court must be sasfied that if the accused fails to appear, the surety is capable of producing the accused. However, instead of surety, the peoner may provide a fixed deposit of INR 10,000/-, with a clause that the interest shall not be accumulated in FD, either drawn from a State- owned bank or any bank listed on the Naonal Stock Exchange and/or Bombay Stock Exchange, in favour of the “Chief Judicial Magistrate” of the concerned Sessions Division; or a fixed deposit made in the name of the peoner, with similar terms and with endorsement from the banker stang that the FD shall not be encumbered or redeemed without the permission of the concerned trial Court, or unl the surety bond has been discharged. 18. 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 aKesng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 19. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 20. 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. 5 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 21. Given the background of allegaons against the peoner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitang the accused would be one of the primary opons unl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquiKal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restricon 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 sancon]. Given the nature of the allegaons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the peoner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunion, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiMeen days from release from prison and inform the Invesgator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the peoner shall be entled to renew and take it back in case of acquiKal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricng firearms would insll confidence in the society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeang the offense. 22. The condions menoned 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 Peon (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 condions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proporonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail condions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condions that would result in the deprivaon of rights and liberes must be eschewed.” 23. It is clarified that if the peoner violates any bail condion, the State and/or the vicm may file an applicaon for bail cancellaon before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more condions. Furthermore, if the peoner moves for deleon or diluon of any bail condions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 24. The significant consideraon for granng bail is that the Court aims to give the peoner another chance to course-correct, reform, and reintegrate into the community as an ideal cizen. To ensure that the peoner also abides by the assurance made on the peoner’s behalf by not repeang the offence or indulging in any crime, it shall be desirable to impose the following addional condion. 25. This bail is condional, with the foundaonal condion being that if the 6 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11564-2025 peoner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State shall file an applicaon to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdicon over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail as well as bail granted in other FIRs, and as per their discreon, they may cancel this bail. 26. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 27. In Amit Rana v. State of Haryana, CRM-18469-2025 [Decided on 05.08.2025), in CRA-D-123-2020], a Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in paragraph 13, holds that “To ensure that every person in judicial custody who has been granted bail or whose sentence has been suspended gets back their liberty without any delay, it is appropriate that whenever the bail order or the orders of suspension of sentence are not immediately sent by the Registry, computer systems, or Public Prosecutor, then in such a situaon, to facilitate the immediate restoraon of the liberty granted by any Court, the downloaded copies of all such orders, subject to verificaon, must be accepted by the Court before whom the bail bonds are furnished.” 28. Pe00on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 12.09.2025 Jyo-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 7 JYOTI 2025.09.12 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.