CRM-M-39312-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39312-2024 Reserved on: 03.02.2025 Pronounced on: 14.02.2025 SK Abdul Sayeed ...Peoner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Amzad Khan, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Rubal Pawar, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Anureet S.Sidhu, Advocate, for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 17 05.02.2024 Amloh, Dis-. Fatehgarh Sahib 307, 506, 148, 149 IPC 1. The peoner 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. In paragraph 11 of the bail peon, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “3. The brief facts of the case are that the present F.I.R (Annexure P-1) was registered on the statement of the complainant Jaisul Haq to the effect that he has been doing work as a labourer in Shri Ram Ply Wood Factory for 4-5 days. Their contractor is from their village, whose name is Mohammad Jamaal. Before them, the pe11oner Abdul Sayeed was doing work as a contractor of his labour in the factory, due to their work in the factory, the work of the pe11oner Abdul Sayeed was reduced. The pe11oner Abdul along with his accomplice labourers namely Shankar Mahapatar, Umesh, and Deepu had been threatening to kill him and his 1 JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-39312-2024 contractor Mohammad Jamaal for 2-3 days. On 04.02.2024, at around 10:00 PM, a8er the closing of the factory, the pe11oner Abdul was armed with an iron Dah in his right hand, Shanker was armed with an iron dah in his hand, and Tarlochan, Hafeez, and Deepu Singh were armed with s1cks in their hands, a:acked on the complainant and Mohammad Jamal, with their weapons intending to kill us. The pe11oner Abdul hit the iron dah/datar on the head, mouth, and ear of the complainant intending to kill him. Shankar Mahapatar, with the inten1on to kill his contractor Mohammad Jamaal, started hi<ng with iron dah/datar on his head and mouth con1nuously. Then, Umesh, Tarochan, Hafeez, and Deepu also started bea1ng us with their weapons. Then, the complainant raised the alarm. A8er hearing the noise of the complainant, other labourers who worked in the factory gathered on the spot, and seeing the gathering of the labourers, the accused persons ran away from the spot along with their respec1ve weapons and his contractor Mohammad Jamaal became unconscious. The mo1ve behind the occurrence is that the work of the pe11oner Abdul and his labour was reduced due to the arrival of the complainant and his contractor, the pe11oner and his accomplice wanted to evict them from the factory but they did not leave the factory, due to which the pe11oner Abdul and his accomplices all a:acked them with sharp weapons intending to kill them. Then the labourers admi:ed the complainant and other injured persons to Jain Hospital Khanna for treatment.” 4. Counsel for the peoner prays bail on the ground that the ma-er has been compromised. He further prays for bail by imposing any stringent condions and contends that further pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoner and his family. 5. Counsel for complainant submits that the peoner and the aggrieved persons were co-workers and now they se-led the dispute and they would have no objecon in case this Court grants bail to the peoner. 6. State counsel opposes the bail. He submits that the ma-er is serious and involves Secon 307 IPC. He refers to para 7 of the status report, which reads as follows: “7. That the role of the pe11oner Abdul Sayeed is that the pe11oner is accused of leading the assault on the complainant and Mohammad Jamaal and the pe11oner along with his accomplice inflicted mul1ple injuries on the part of the complainant and Mohammad Jamaal. The pe11oner hit the iron dah/datar on the head mouth, and ear of the complainant intending to kill him. Moreover, the weapon used by the 2 JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-39312-2024 pe11oner, an iron dah/datar, is s1ll to be recovered. Therefore, custodial interroga1on of the pe11oner is deemed necessary for the inves1ga1on.” 7. Given the nature of allegaons coupled with the fact that pares have compromised the ma-er, peoner is entled for bail. However, it is clarified that this bail order shall neither be considered as a reason to quash the FIR nor shall come as hindrance in the way of the prosecuon or the Court in case, there is violaon of Secons 216/217 of BNS 2023 (181/182 IPC earlier). REASONING: 8. 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. 9. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaons, factum of compromise and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability for custodial interrogaon or the pre-trial incarceraon at this stage. 10. 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. 11. 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 ma-er 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. 12. 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 a-esng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 3 JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-39312-2024 13. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 14. The pe11oner is directed to join the inves1ga1on 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 Inves1gator. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above condions and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law. 19. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 20. 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 a-est it to be a true copy. If the a-esng officer 4 JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-39312-2024 wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for a-esng bonds. 21. Pe00on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 14.02.2025 Jyo-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 5 JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.