Vir Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-11657-2025 212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 CRM-M-11657-2025 Decided on: 02.07.2025 Vir Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Gagandeep Singh Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner.
Legal Reasoning
evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre- trial incarceration. 9. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. 10. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 11. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 12. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation 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 Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During ANJU RANI 2025.07.14 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 3 CRM-M-11657-2025 the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, 4 inhuman treatment, etc. 13. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner 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. In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 15. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 16. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 18. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand
Arguments
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 118 24.09.2024 Sultanwind, 306 BNS 2023 (Section District Amritsar 317(2) of BNS added later on) 1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. Per paragraph 13 of the bail petition and para 10 of the status report, the accused has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “…. the present case FIR No. 118, dated 24.09.2024, under Section 306 BNS, Police Station Sultanwind, Amritsar was registered on the basis of statement of the Complainant Robin Aggarwal wherein it was alleged that he runs business of screw in the name of Harish Tool Industry at Wadhawa Singh Colony, Tarn Taran Road, Amritsar. Harpinder Singh S/o Balbir Singh and Brigesh Kumar S/o Surat have been doing labour work with him for approximate 3 to 4 years. The complainant was facing a huge loss since last 3 to 4 months and he was finding goods in the factory 1 ANJU RANI 2025.07.14 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-11657-2025 2 in lesser quantity. He had doubt that where his goods were going to; hence the complainant started keeping surveillance on them (Harpinder Singh & Brigesh Kumar). On 15.09.2024 at about 06PM, Harpinder Singh had gone outside of the factory and Brigesh was inside the factory. Harpinder Singh switched of jumper of electricity transformer and Brigesh took away two sacks of screws weighing 35Kg each. He (complainant) did not do anything. Thereafter on 22.09.2024 at about 6:20PM, Harpinder Singh again switched of jumper of electricity transformer and again Brigesh took away 2 sacks of screws weighing 35 Kg each and now both of them have run away from the factory of the complainant. The complainant further stated that he is confident that some other accomplices could be with them. The legal action be taken against them.” 4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail and submits that petitioner undertakes to fully cooperate in the investigation and he will help in recovery of stolen articles, without conceding and admitting. He further contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows: “ROLE OF THE PETITIONER:- That the deponent respectfully submits that in view of the above submissions, it transpires that the present petitioner Vir Singh @ Kaka along with the co-accused persons Harpinder Singh and Brigesh Kumar was involved in stealing sacks of screws from the factory of the complainant. The co-accused persons Harpinder Singh and Brigesh Kumar have made disclosure statements with respect to involvement of the present petitioner Vir Singh @ Kaka with them in commission of crime as well as with respect to stolen property in possession of the petitioner. Though the petitioner has joined the investigation but he has not cooperated with the Investigating Officer and has fot got effected recovery of the stolen property. Hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner Vir Singh @ Kaka is required for fair and proper investigation. As such, the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is 2 ANJU RANI 2025.07.14 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-11657-2025 liable to be dismissed. 3 REASONING: 7. Given the nature of allegations and undertaking of petitioner, no ground to deny bail to petitioner is made out. 8. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The
Decision
disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 02.07.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: ANJU RANI 2025.07.14 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 4