The High Court
Case Details
229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Karan Kalra State of Punjab CRM-M-16747-2025 (O&M) Reserved on: 07.05.2025 Pronounced on: 12.05.2025 Versus ........Petitioner(s) ........Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Ajaypal Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.
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 prima facie 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, subject to the compliance of terms and conditions mentioned in this order. 10. 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. CONDITIONS: 11. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, he shall be released on 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 ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.05.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-16747-2025 -3- 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. 12. 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) 13. This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. 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. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation 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 the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 15. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim until the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigation, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. 16. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, victim and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of the evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.05.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-16747-2025 -4- other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days and inform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and reclaim them in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the offense. 17. The conditions mentioned 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 Petition (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 conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed.” 18. 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. 19. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which has been empowered and will be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 20. 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 have the liberty to cancel this bail. 21. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 22. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.05.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-16747-2025 -5- 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. 23. Petitions allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
Arguments
Ms. Mehak Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. *** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 98 02.11.2024 PAU, Police District Commissionerate Ludhiana 333, 115(2), 126(2), 324(2), 351(2), 190, 191(3) of BNS 2023 1. The petitioner(s) apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. In paragraph 3 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “That it is submitted that the complainant, Deepak Arora, made a statement before the police, alleging that on 01.11.2024, at approximately 3:00 p.m., while he was returning home in his car (PB-10HK-9950), two unidentified individuals on a bullet motorcycle intercepted him and asked him to move his vehicle aside. While the complainant was complying, an altercation ensued, following which said the left individuals in anger. Subsequently, these individuals, along with 7-8 other persons armed with rods, daatars, swords, and baseball bats, arrived at the complainant's house and vandalized two cars-Innova (PB-10HK- 9950) and Swift (PB-10FG-7151)-which were parked at House No.1448. Furthermore, the accused persons physically assaulted one Neeraj Kumar, who had arrived to meet a tenant in the house, using iron rods. The complainant's sister-in-law, Shweta, also came outside and was attacked with swords by accused Raja Giri. It has been alleged that Raja Giri was the mastermind of the entire incident and is actively running a ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.05.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-16747-2025 -2- criminal gang and an antisocial group. The entire sequence of events was captured in the CCTV cameras installed at the complainant's house, which later revealed the identity of the assailants.” 4. The petitioner’s counsel on instructions undertakes that petitioner shall live like a decent citizen and would not repeat the offence and if he does so, petitioner has no objection if the State files application for cancellation of bail in the present FIR. He further prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and his 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: “12. Role of the Petitioner (Karan Kalra): That the role of the petitioner i.e. Karan Kalra, as alleged in the present case, is that he was one of the assailants involved in the incident. As per the supplementary statement of the complainant and the CCTV footage, the petitioner unlawfully entered the complainant's house and assaulted using a brick. His actions resulted in injuries to the injured victim namely Neeraj and Shweta, which are corroborated by the medical report.” REASONING: 7. Given the nature of injuries, coupled with other allegations and petitioner’s clear antecedents as well as the undertaking in the order dated 07.05.2025 and above, this Court thinks that petitioner should be given one chance to mend his ways. 8. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The
Decision
stand disposed of. 12-05-2025 AK (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.05.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh