CRM-M-25056 25056-2025 283 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGA NJAB AND HARYANA v. CRM-M-25056-2025 Decided on:08.07.2025
Case Details
CRM-M-25056 25056-2025 283 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGA NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH RITU Versus CRM-M-25056-2025 Decided on:08.07.2025 ...Petitioner STATE OF PUN F PUNJAB AND ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CH P CHITKARA Present: Mr. Jaiveer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Legal Reasoning
Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, D.A.G., Pun ., Punjab. Mr. Chandan Singh Rana, Advocate for respondent No.2. ANOOP CHITK HITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 58 21.06.2023 Division No.4, No.4 307, 148, 149 and 506 of IPC District Ludhiana dhiana, read with Section 25/54/59 of Police District Distric erate Commissionerate Arms Act (Section 326 of IPC added later on)(cid:1) 1. Seeking ca ing cancellation of bail granted to the acc FIR he accused/respondent(s) No.2 in the FIR captioned above above, the aggrieved person has come u ction ome up before this Court under Section 483(3) of BNSS BNSS 2023. 2. Vide order order dated 30.07.2024 (Annexure P-4), c t had 4), co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted bail to th il to the accused/respondent(s) No.2 on the wing on the ground mentioned in the following paragraphs of the s of the order: “ In the present case, petitioner was n he as not named in the FIR but lateron he was nominated by the complainant/in nt. nt/injured in his subsequent statement. The investigation in the present case the ase already stands concluded with the filing of challan followed by framing fi the ing of charges. However, none of the prosecution witness, out of 24 as cited p the cited, has been examined and thus, the trial is definitely going to take some tim e time. Jyoti 2025.07.14 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 CRM-M-25056 25056-2025 As regards the involvement of the peti A ted petitioner in other case, he has granted the concession of regular bail.” (cid:2)(cid:3) Petitione titioner’s counsel seeks cancellation of ba was of bail on the ground that the bail was wrongly granted ranted and after that the accused is const tim’s constantly roaming around the victim’s ring at them, threatening her and there is hug her is huge risk to the life of petitioner & her house, staring at family.(cid:1) (cid:4)(cid:3) Counsel fo nsel for the respondent No.2-accused filed r f the filed reply in the Court today. Copy of the same has been been supplied to counsel for the petition - etitioner. Counsel for respondent No.2- accused submits ubmits that the bail may not be cancelled any ncelled and this Court may impose any stringent conditio onditions in addition to the conditions impo rther s imposed by this Court earlier. He further submits that pet at petitioner never violated any condition also dition as imposed by this Court. He also undertakes that r s that respondent No.2-accused will not ente - enter in the street where the petitioner- complainant is r nt is residing and will not make eye ball co as her family me ily members and will surrender firearms, if well ball contact with the complainant as well ms, if any.(cid:1) 5. I have hea ve heard counsel for the parties. In the fa unds the facts and circumstances, no grounds exist to cancel th ncel the bail, however this court is of the v s can f the view that some more conditions can be imposed upon d upon the accused in addition to the condit condition imposed vide impugned order. 6. Given th ven the nature of the allegations and the o this the other circumstances peculiar to this case, responden ondent(s) No.2 shall not enter the victim ber’s victim as well as her family member’s property, workp workplace, and residence until the stateme rmal tatements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the in the trial are recorded. This Court is imp t any is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the a the accused to incapacitate, influence, or ctim. ce, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be ma be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bure SCR l Bureau of Investigation, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and ); and Aparna Bhat v. The State of Madh ne SC 230.(cid:1) SCC Online SC 2021 Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 7. Till the c l the completion of the trial, the accused/re tact, sed/respondent(s) No.2 shall not contact, call, text, messa message, remark, stare, stalk, make any g al or any gestures or express any unusual or inappropriate, ve ate, verbal or otherwise objectionable behav tim’s behavior towards the victim and victim’s family, either ph ther physically or through phone call or an other mode, nor e, nor shall unnecessarily roam around the v any l or any other social media, through any d the victim’s home and workplace. 8. Given the ven the background of allegations against th nt to inst the accused, it becomes paramount to protect the mem e members of society and incapacitating f the tating the accused would be one of the Jyoti 2025.07.14 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CRM-M-25056 25056-2025 primary options ptions until the filing of the closure ittal. sure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, i ntly, it would be appropriate to restrict [This ict the possession of firearms. [This restriction is bei is being imposed based on the prepondera bility onderance of the evidence of probability and not of evide evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reason ot to reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as ed as an intermediate sanction]. Given th d the ven the nature of the allegations and the other circumstan mstances peculiar to this case, the accused er all cused-respondent No.2 shall surrender all weapons, firearm firearms, and ammunition, if any, along wit rned ng with the arms license to the concerned authority within within fifteen days from today and inform ance. nform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subjec subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the enew 9, the accused shall be entitled to renew and reclaim them m them in case of acquittal in this case, pr nder se, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned ru ned rules. Restricting firearms would insti their d instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and soc nd society; it would also restrain the accu ing the offense. and repeating the esses e accused from influencing the witnesses 8. Petition s tion stands dismissed with the terms terms mentioned above. All pending ing applications, if a
Decision
ns, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP NOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 08.07.2025 Jyoti-IV Whether sp Whether re ther speaking/reasoned: ther reportable: Yes No. (cid:1) Jyoti 2025.07.14 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3