CRM-M-52425-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-52425-2024 Reserved on: 13.01.2025 Pronounced on: 27.01.2025 Jagtar Singh @ Kala ...Peoner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Ankit Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Mandeep Kumar Dhot, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Akshay Kumar, A.A.G, Punjab. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 110 12.06.2023 Lehra, District Sangrur 458, 324, 307, 341, 201, 148, 149 IPC 1. The peoner incarcerated in the FIR caponed above came before this Court under Secon 439 CrPC, seeking regular bail. 2. In paragraph 05 of the bail peon, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: “2. xxx xxx the brief facts of present No.FIR No.110 dated 12.06.2023 u/s 458, 324, 307, 341, 148, 149 IPC P.S. Lehra, District Sangrur are that the present FIR was registered against Nikka Singh son of Bhola Singh, Gursewak Singh son of Bhola Singh residents of Bhai Ki Pishor, P.S. Lehra, District Sangrur and un-known person(s) on the basis of statement of Binder Singh son of Maghi Singh resident of Bhai Ki Pishor to the effect that on 11.06.2023, at about 11:30 P.M., Nikka Singh, Gursewak Singh and 5/6 unknown persons entered into the house of his brother Bhola Singh, who rescued himself by closing the door from inside and then the said persons threw bricks/stones on the windows/door of the house, then Bhola Singh raised alarm and the aforesaid persons ran away from the 1 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52425-2024 spot and therea8er, he (Binder Singh) and his nephew Kalu Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Sagar Singh were going to the police sta9on then Nikka Singh and others surrounded them and Nikka Singh hit Kalu Singh with sword on his head, then Gursewak Singh hit Kalu Singh with sword on his head and then Binder Singh tried to rescue him (Kalu Singh), then Nikka Singh hit Binder Singh with sword on his le8 elbow. On raising alarm, aforesaid persons ran away from the spot along with weapons. The mo9ve behind is that, Gursewak Singh did something wrong to a girl from our houses 2/3 months ago and we used to stop him from doing so. Due to this reason Gursewak Singh and his companions gave bea9ngs to them with the inten9on to kill to them.” 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 status report. 6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the status report, which read as follows: “5. That accused Gursewak Singh was arrested on 17.06.2023. During interroga9on he disclosed that the weapons which were used in the crime by four of us, were thrown in the Bhakhra Canal. Due to non recovery of weapon, offence u/s 201 IPC was added. On 18.06.2023 Binder Singh (complainant of the case) recorded his supplementary statement before the I.O. that he made inquiry regarding the un-known person(s) involved in the crime and came to know that the name of two persons are as Maninder Singh son of Tarsem Singh resident of Chhahar and Jagtar Singh @ Kala son of Janta Singh resident of Nangla. Ac9on be taken against them. On the basis of said statement of Binder Singh, the persons namely Maninder Singh and Jagtar Singh @ Kala (now pe99oner) were nominated as accused in this case. During ongoing inves9ga9on person namely Maninder Singh and Gurpreet Singh @ Nikka were found as Juvenile. Due to which they were joined the inves9ga9on on 18.06.2023 and were produced before the Court of Ld. Juvenile Jus9ce Board and with the permission of Court, they were lodged in Home Observa9on, Ludhiana. 2 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52425-2024 10. ROLE OF THE PETITIONER The present FIR was registered against accused Gursewak Singh and Nikka Singh (later on verified as Gurpreet Singh @Nikka) and un-known person(s) on the basis of statement of Binder Singh son of Maghi. During inves9ga9on on the basis of supplementary statement made by complainant Binder Singh, the persons namely Maninder Singh and Jagtar Singh @ Kala (now pe99oner) were nominated as accused in this case. It was duly substan9ated that on 11.06.2023, all the four accused including present pe99oner Jagtar Singh @ Kala forcibly entered into the house of Bhola Singh (brother of complainant) and threw bricks/stones on the windows/door of the house. On the same day i.e. 11.06.2023, when complainant alongwith Malkit Singh @ Kalu, Gurdeep Singh and Sagar Singh were going to the police sta9on, then on the way, all the four accused including present pe99oner Jagtar Singh @ Kala gave bea9ngs to the complainant Binder Singh and his nephew Malkit Singh @ Kalu and inflicted 2 injuries to Binder Singh and 10 injuries to Malkit Singh @ Kalu with the inten9on to kill them. Out of 10 injuries on the person of Malkit Singh @ Kalu, injuries no. 1 to 7 were declared by the doctor as grievous in nature. Accused/pe99oner Jagtar Singh @ Kala inflicted injuries no. 5 and 6 (as per detail facts given in para no. 7 above) on the person of Malkit Singh @ Kalu with the inten9on to kill him. So, a specific role is aGributed to the pe99oner in the commission of present serious offence.” 7. The incident was of 12.06.2023 and the peoner was named in a supplementary statement dated 13.06.2023. Despite that, the peoner was arrested on 07.02.2024 i.e. a=er 08 months. Furthermore, the peoner’s custody is slightly less than one year, on this ground alone, it is not a case for custodial interrogaon or pre- trial incarceraon. 8. 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. 9. As per paragraph 3 (III) of the bail peon, the peoner has been in custody since 07.02.2024. As per the same, the peoner’s total custody in this FIR is around eleven months. 10. Given 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 3 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52425-2024 case, there would be no jusfiability further pre-trial incarceraon at this stage. 11. 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. 12. 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 concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepng the surety, the concerned Court must be sasfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 13. 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 aGesng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 14. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 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. Given the nature of the allegaons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the peoner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the vicm unl the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condion to rule out any aGempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the vicm. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Invesgaon, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna BhaG v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. 17. Given the background of allegaons against the peoner, it becomes paramount to protect the vicm, and their family members, as well as the members of 4 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52425-2024 society, and incapacitang the accused would be one of the primary opons unl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquiGal. 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 fi=een 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 acquiGal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricng firearms would insll confidence in the vicm(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeang the offense. 18. 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.” 19. 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. 20. 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 have the liberty to cancel this bail. 21. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 22. 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 5 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52425-2024 official web page of this Court and aGest it to be a true copy. If the aGesng officer wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aGesng bonds. 23. Pe00on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 27.01.2025 Jyo0-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 6 JYOTI 2025.01.28 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.