CRM-M-50083-2024 206-2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-50083-2024 Date of Decision: 07.01.2025 Ashu Sabharwal @ Ashu ...Peoner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, A.A.G, Punjab assisted by ASI Parvinder Singh. Mr. Rajat Dogra, Advocate for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. DDR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 34 24.06.2024 ‘A’ Division, Amritsar 452, 427, 148, 149 IPC in FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 98 24.06.2024 ‘A’ Division, Amritsar 323, 341, 506, 148, 149, 325 IPC (added later on) 1. The peoner apprehending arrest in the DDR caponed above has come up before this Court under Secon 482 of Bharaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking ancipatory bail. 2. In paragraph 16 of the bail peon, the accused declares that he has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case except cross case. However, as per paragraph 10 of the status report dated 11.11.2024 the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offenses Police Sta0on 1. 84 13.05.2024 447, 448, 427, 148, 149 IPC A Division, Amritsar 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: 1 JYOTI 2025.01.13 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50083-2024 “3. That the brief and relevant facts of the case are that aforesaid FIR No. 98 dated 24.06.2024 was registered on the basis of the statement of Sunny alias Kadar, who had alleged therein that on 23.06.2024 at about 03:30/04:00 PM, he, his brother Sonu Sabharwal and Ravi Kumar and Rajiv Khokhar and his brother Aniket Khokhar of their opposite side had gone at the shop of Arora Bus Travels for the se0lement of their old dispute but the compromise could not be effected and he and his brother Sonu Sabharwal went to their house and when they were about to leave for their shop, he saw Rajiv Khokhar, Aniket Khokhar, Parveen Khokhar and Joban Gill armed with a kahi dasta along with 6/7 uniden5fied persons a0acked his brother Sonu and when he came to forward to rescue his brother, all the aforesaid accused also gave him bea5ng. He further alleged that Parveen Khokhar raised a lalkara to teach them a lesson and on listening the noises, his wife Vandhna and nephew Sameer also came at the spot and Sameer was armed with a kahi for his self defence but the co-accused Rajiv Khokhar snatched kahi from Sameer and caused injury on the head of his wife Vandhna with a blow of a kahi and injury on the head of his brother Sonu and when he raised hue and cry, all the aforesaid accused fled away from the spot. The detailed facts men5oned by Sunny alias Kadar in his aforesaid statement has been reproduced in the true transla5on of the aforesaid FIR No. 98 dated 24.06.2024 a0ached with the pe55on as Annexure P-2, which may kindly be read as a part of present paragraph as same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.” 4. Counsel for the peoner submits that it is a cross-case and peoner was not aggressor. He 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 State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the reply, which read as follows: “6. That a cross case vide G.D No. 34 dated 24.06.2024 under sec5on 452, 427, 148 and 149 Indian Penal Code was registered on the basis of the complaint filed by Parveen Kaur, who had alleged therein that on 23.06.2024, there was dispute between her family and Sonu Sabharwal during the day5me and at about 10:15 PM, Sameer, Ashu(pe55oner), Kadar, brother in law of Sameer, Hula along with 35 uniden5fied persons forcibly trespassed into her house and damaged their window panes, fridge, LED TV, Laptop and other household items and at the 5me 2 JYOTI 2025.01.13 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50083-2024 of the alleged occurrence, her daughter Seema was alone at her house and all the aforesaid accused had taken a gold of about Rs. 10 Lakh and cash of Rs. 6 Lakh from the almirah of Rajiv Khokhar. The detailed facts men5oned by Parveen Kaur in her aforesaid complaint has been reproduced in the true transla5on of the G.D No. 34 dated 24.06.2024 a0ached with the pe55on as Annexure P-1, which may kindly be read as a part of present paragraph as same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity. 7. That beside the pe55oner, the names of the co-accused nominated as accused in the present cross case are as under:- i. Sameer son of Sonu; ii. Sunny alias Kadar son of Sham Lal; iii. Brother in law of Sameer; iv. Vishal alias Hulla son of Rinku. Role of the pe oner 8. That as per the version of the complainant Parveen Kaur, the pe55oner as an ac5ve member of an unlawful assembly consis5ng of him and the other co- accused had forcibly trespassed into her house and damaged their window panes, fridge, LED TV, Laptop and other household items and at the 5me of the alleged occurrence, her daughter Seema was alone at her house.” 7. A perusal of para 6 of the reply clearly points out of the cross-case. At this stage, it is very difficult to determine who was the aggressor? Even the complainant is stated to have handed over a video clipping to the invesgator as menoned in the order dated 03.12.2024. Thus, it is not a case for custodial interrogaon or pre-trial incarceraon. 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 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 3 JYOTI 2025.01.13 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50083-2024 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 bail in the FIR caponed above subject to furnishing bonds to the sasfacon of the Arresng Officer, and if the maJer 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 aJesng 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 peoner’s complying with the following terms. 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. The pe55oner is directed to join the inves5ga5on 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 Inves5gator. 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. 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 4 JYOTI 2025.01.13 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50083-2024 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. 16. 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. 17. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 18. 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 aJest it to be a true copy. If the aJesng officer wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aJesng bonds. 19. Pe00on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 07.01.2025 Jyo-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 5 JYOTI 2025.01.13 09:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.