Date Hetlal State of Harya Haryana v. ioner
Case Details
1 1 CRM-M-11443- -2025 (O&M) 210 IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB NJAB AND HARYANA AT GARH CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11443-2025 (O&M) M) 2025 Date of decision: August 01, 2025 Date Hetlal State of Harya Haryana versus ioner ….Petitioner dent ….Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Narender Singh Tewatia, Adv Advocate for the petitioner.
Legal Reasoning
) 477 & judgments of this Court in CR ed as t in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Sing Singh v. State of Haryana, decided j v. ecided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Harya aryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191 l) 191. Suffice to say, further detenti s an detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is no al is not warranted in the facts and circ nd circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present pe er is ent petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be to be released on regular bail on his f ds to n his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfactio sfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/D r, in CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to co to conditions that may be imposed Duty posed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the ate, the petitioner shall remain bound b ound by the following conditions: The petitioner shall not mis (i) (ii) The petitioner shall not tam documentary, during the tri (iii) The petitioner shall not abs ot mis-use the liberty granted. or ot tamper with any evidence, oral or the trial. efore ot absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not com ot commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposi the deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.01 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM-M-11443- -2025 (O&M) 5 5 (vi) The petitioner shall give Investigating Officer/SHO and shall not change his ce permission of the CJM/Dut (vii) The petitioner shall not in the give his cellphone number to the r/SHO of concerned Police Station ation prior his cell-phone number without prior Duty Magistrate. the not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8. In case of breach of any of the a those f the aforesaid conditions and those which may b ay be imposed by concerned CJM ected CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove ove or upon showing any o ny other sufficient cause, the the State/complain mplainant shall be at liberty to mov f the o move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. 10. Ordered accordingly. Nothing said hereinabove shall be on of hall be construed as an expression of opinion on the on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been de eous een decided, pending miscellaneous application, if ion, if any, shall also stands disposed o osed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE August 01, 20 mahavir , 2025 Whether speakin peaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportab eportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.01 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
Arguments
Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryan aryana. SUMEET GO T GOEL, J. (ORAL) ***** 1. Present petition has been filed the filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nag Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (f nt of (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to bail to the petitioner in case bearing F , aring FIR No.147 dated 07.04.2023, registered for d for the offences punishable under S of nder Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 of IPC, at Police olice Station Central Faridabad, Distr , District Faridabad. 2. The case set up in the FIR in que esent in question (as set out in the present petition by the by the petitioner) is as follows:- “To, Mr. Commissioner of Police, Application for legal action agains A A Advocate Mobile No. 965067923, 2- Singh son of Jujhar Singh resident of v Chamkaur Sahib, District Ropar, Rup Vishnuram, resident of Tehsil Nal Himachal Pradesh, 5- Kamal Singh s village Dhana, Post Bhatinda, Tehsil Pradesh, 6 Hetlal son of Deviram, re and District Palwal. Sir, this is the re Advocate, am from Chamber No. 34, D A ect lice, Sector-21 C, Faridabad Subject tia ainst two persons 1- Satish Tewatia Sonu Tewatia Advocate 3 Harmanjit njit t of village Ferozepur, Post Bela, Tehsil sil of Rupnagar, Punjab, 4 Veerchand son of Nalagarh, Baglehar Panjera, Solan, an, gh son of Gurcharan Singh resident of of hsil Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal hal sil , resident of village Chirawata Tehsil e request that I, the applicant Rishipal pal - 34, District and Sessions Court, Sector- MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.01 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM-M-11443- -2025 (O&M) 2 2 12, Faridabad and I practice in D registered a case no. 234/2019 under Police Station Chhainsa, Faridabad Singh is the accused. In this case H accused no. 1 Satish Tewatia lawyer lawyer, got fake bail from accused accused no. 5 Kamal Singh made fake accused no. 4 Veer Chand, accused n Tata 407, registration number HP-12 This fact I came to know after checkin come to know that the accused No. 6 H bail in many cases earlier also in con money. One of the cases is in my kno 2017, Police Station Camp Palwal. In has given bail on 08.03.2018 in the c C.G.M. Palwal. The said case is still p which is 15-04-2023. The above ac collusion with accused No. 3 and 4, k only once, got the fake bail of accus accused No. 5 done, which was done Himani Gill, J.M.I.C. Faridabad. 3- Th no. 1 and 2 deliberately got the PAN attached on the court file at the time of suspect that accused no. 1 and 2, alon sureties, work to provide fake suretie thoroughly inquired and investigated. given a written application dated 21 Faridabad, whose diary number is 43 has been taken by the police on the ap is requested to you that by registerin action should be taken against the abo taken. Note: - Along with my applica fa fake document given by accused no. Palwal and Faridabad. Dated 5/12/2 Chamber No. 34, District and Sess 9911813090 Today, a complaint numb was received at ADA Rai police station the complaint, the crime under sectio and case no. 147 dated 07.04.2023 CENTRAL FBD has been registered a Report are being prepared by comp service of the area magistrate or office p police along with the original comp Vishal for further action. The case is ASI Amit Kumar.” A ave in District Court, Faridabad. I have at nder sections 279/337/338/304A IPC at ad in which accused no. 3 Harmanjit njit se Harmanjit Singh, in collusion with ith tia wyer and accused no. 2 Sonu Tewatia sed no. 6 Hetlal in the said case and nd fake identification and in collusion with ith of sed no. 5 and 6 also gave superdari of se. 12 K 5882 involved in the above case. cking the court file. 2- That now I have ave . 6 Hetlal is a fake bailor and has given ven ing connivance with lawyers and by taking knowledge, FIR No. 882, dated 11-10- - l. In which the said accused No. 6 Hetlal tlal the court of Shri S.K. Sharma, the then en of till pending in the court, the next date of accused No. 1 and 2 knowingly, in in 4, knowing that a person can give bail ail of ccused No. 6 and fake identification of rs. one on 15-11-2019 in the court of Mrs. That in order to get fake bail, accused sed AN card of accused no. 6 Hetlal surety ety 11 e of bail instead of his Aadhar card. 11 along with accused no. 6 and other fake ake reties in the court, which needs to be be ave ted. 4- That Sir, in this regard, I have ral 21-11-2022 in Police Station Central is 438-5 P. But till date no legal action ion e application given by me. Therefore, it , it t tering a case on my application, strict be above accused. Legal action should be lication, I have enclosed a copy of the the no. 6 Hetlal in the honorable court of of te, /12/2022 Applicant, Rishipal Advocate, Sessions Court, Sector-12, Faridabad ad number 115/CP DATED on 20.01.2023 23 s of ation after investigation. On the basis of nd ctions 420,465,467,471 IPC was found 023 Section 420,465,467,471 IPC PS PS red and copies of the First Information ion the omputer as per rules and sent to the officers of Bajaria Post. The copy of the the omplaint will be handed over to P/SI /SI of e is being registered in the presence of 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner ioner itioner has iterated that the petitioner has been false n falsely implicated into the FIR in q l has R in question. Learned counsel has iterated that th that the petitioner is in custody since unsel since 09.10.2024. Learned counsel MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.01 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM-M-11443- -2025 (O&M) 3 3 has further su submitted that there is no tangib h the tangible material available with the prosecution, so tion, so as to warrant conviction of the bail of the petitioner. Thus, regular bail d for. is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opp by s opposed the present petition by arguing that th that the allegations raised against the ature st the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he he does not deserve the concessio rned cession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel unsel seeks to place on record custod 2025 custody certificate dated 31.07.2025 in Court, whic , which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival ough rival parties and have gone through the available re lable records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested after sted on 09.10.2024 whereinafter investigation w ation was carried out and challan was p Total was presented on 05.12.2024. Total 09 prosecution ecution witnesses have been cited, bu d till but none has been examined till date. It is not is not in dispute that the trial emanatin on is nating from the FIR in question is magisterial tri rial trial. The rival contentions raised table raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which hich shall be ratiocinated upon during ourt during the course of trial. This Court does not deem deem it appropriate to delve deep i s, at deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest e, lest it may prejudice the trial. Noth ught l. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to in to indicate the likelihood of the pe the the petitioner absconding from the process of ju justice or interfering with the p per the prosecution evidence. As per custody certifi certificate dated 31.07.2025 filed by l, the ed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has r has already suffered incarceration 09 ration for a period of more than 09 months. MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.01 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4 4 CRM-M-11443- -2025 (O&M) 6.1. Further, as per the said custody ce stated ody certificate the petitioner is stated to be involved volved in multiple cases. However, th ound ver, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by it t by itself, to decline the concession of er in ssion of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in que in question when a case is made out fo the out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in questio uestion by ratiocinating upon the facts/ FIR. e facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in th in this regard can be placed upon n’ble upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Cour Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir R nd ir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Di f the ; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcu Calcutta High Court in case of Sridha CR ridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477