CRM-M-50124-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-50124-2024 Reserved on: 16.01.2025 Pronounced on: 24.01.2025 Ram Mur Yadav ...Peoner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Pranshul Dhull, Advocate for the peoner. Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta/on Sec/ons 273 24.06.2024 Palam Vihar, Dis+. Gurugram 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC 1. The peoner apprehending arrest in the FIR caponed above has come up before this Court under Secon 438 of CrPC, seeking ancipatory bail. In paragraph 5 (E) of the bail peon, Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offenses Police Sta/on 1. 170 24.06.2024 420, 467, 471, 120-B IPC Sector-4, Gurgaon 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the reply dated 22-10-2024, filed by the State, which reads as follows: “3. That the back drop of the instant maer is that on 24.06.2024, a telephonic message through Chief Minister flying squad Gurugram Haryana was received to the effect that they along with RTA Gurugram team had apprehended a person in a room built on Delhi Road near Kataria Chowk, who was making fake receipts of toll tax and MCD parking. On the basis of this informa/on, police team had reached at the spot where Traffic Sub Inspector Sanjeev Kumar along with Inspector Suresh Chand, SI Satbir of flying squad team met them and presented a complaint. It was alleged in the complaint that he was posted in the office 1 JYOTI 2025.01.24 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50124-2024 of District Transport Officer, Gurugram and on that day, he had received an informa/on from the office of Chief Minister's Flying Squad, Gurugram that a person named Shubham Yadav was making fake receipts of passenger tax of Haryana and other states and fake receipts of airport parking, hotel parking, Toll Tax and other parking charges through computer and 10/- per receipt was given to the customers and taxi drivers which they misused. On that basis raid was conducted at the above address where a person was found working on the computer in a room. On asking the name and address, he disclosed his name as Shubham Yadav S/o Kanhiya Lal R/o Village Shivgarh Mitai, P.S. Ramgarh, Dis Partapgarh, UP. A large number of car parking and toll tax slips were recovered from the spot. On inquiry, Shubham Yadav told that he prepared the said parking and toll tax receipts and passengers tax receipts of Haryana and other state through computer for Rs.10/- per receipt and gave the collected cash amount to Ram Mur/ R/o UP. On checking of computer, large number of parking/airport parking fake /cket formats and tax receipts of Haryana and other states were found, and on taking prints, same were found fake. Legal ac/on was sought and accordingly, the abovemen/oned FIR was registered and inves/ga/ons were taken up in the maer.” 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 his 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 dated 22.10.2024, which read as follows: “8. That the pe//oner is the prime accused and the mastermind behind the crime. The pe//oner had recruited accused Shubham Yadav for the commission of crime. He had set up the en/re opera/on, provided computers and equipment to accused Shubham. The offences are serious in nature involving systema/c fraud. The pe//oner is a habitual offender and apart from the present case, his complicity has also been found involved in another criminal case bearing FIR No. 170 dated 24.06.2024 registered at PS: Sector 40 for commission of offences punishable under Sec/on 420, 467, 471, 120B of IPC. 2 JYOTI 2025.01.24 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50124-2024 9. That the circumstances warrant custodial interroga/on of the pe//oner not only to effect recoveries of the embezzled amount, but also for ascertaining the modus operandi and the source of forged bills.” 7. It would also be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the reply dated 09-01-2025, which read as follows: “5. That the pe//oner is the prime accused and the mastermind behind the crime. The pe//oner had recruited accused Shubham Yadav for the commission of crime. He had set up the en/re opera/on, provided computers and equipment to accused Shubham. The offences are serious in nature involving organized fraud. 6. That the pe//oner is a habitual offender and apart from the present case, his complicity has also been found involved in another criminal case bearing FIR No.170 dated 24.06.2024 registered at P.S. Sector 40 for commission of offences punishable under Sec/ons 420, 467, 471, 120B of IPC.” 8. Although, peoner is the prime suspect, who had used a minor to commit the offence but the quality of evidence collected against the peoner ll date is in the shape of disclosure statement. Despite peoner joining invesgaon, the police failed to collect that evidence which may be prima facie legally admissible. Thus, this Court cannot send the peoner to custodial interrogaon to fish evidence in the given facts, as such, despite criminal history the peoner cannot be denied the ancipatory bail. 9. 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. 10. 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. This order shall come into force from the me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage. 3 JYOTI 2025.01.24 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50124-2024 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) 13. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 14. 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. 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 4 JYOTI 2025.01.24 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-50124-2024 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 condi onal, and the founda onal condi on is that if the pe oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an applica on for cancella on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 18. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 19. 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 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. 20. Pe//on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 24.01.2025 Jyo/-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 5 JYOTI 2025.01.24 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.