Manjit Singh v. State of Haryana and another
Case Details
CRA-S-1819-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 322 CRA-S-1819-2025 Date of Decision: 03.07.2025 Manjit Singh ... Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate, for the appellant.
Legal Reasoning
[10]. Concerning the applicability of provisions of sec2on 438 Cr.PC, it shall not apply to the cases under Act of 1989. However, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the Act of 1989, the bar created by sec2on 18 and 18A (i) shall not apply. 4. 5. As per paragraph 19 of the grounds of appeal, the appellant has clean antecedents The facts of the case are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: JYOTI 2025.07.08 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1819-2025 2 “2. That the present FIR was registered on the statement of Maan Singh son of Jeet Singh, a member of the Scheduled Caste Community and serving as a Granthi at the Gurudwara Sahib in Isherheri. He alleged that on the morning of 08.05.2025, at around 7:00 A.M., he went to the house of Jaspal Singh in the village to collect milk. Manjeet Singh's house is located near Jaspal Singh's residence. A.er collec/ng the milk and as he was leaving Jaspal Singh's house, Maan Singh saw Manjeet Singh standing outside his home. At that moment Manjeet Singh verbally abused him using caste-based slurs such as "Gi2al," Deid," and "Chamad," and further threatened to kill him if he passed through the street again. The complainant did not respond and quietly returned to the Gurudwara Sahib. 3. That on the basis of above said complaint the present FIR no.131 dated 08.05.2025 under Sec/on 3 of SC/ST Act (Sec/on 351(2) of BNS and Sec/on 3(1), (R), (S), 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (preven/on of Atroci/es), Act 1989 (Amendment 2015) added later on during inves/ga/on of the present case and in/ma/on regarding registra/on of present case also sent to the higher authori/es.” 6. The allega2ons are of abusing and threatening the people belonging to the scheduled castes by using the derogatory words prohibited under the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Preven2on of Atroci2es) Act, 1989 (SCSTPOA). 7. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is willing to hand over an affidavit to the Inves2ga2ng Officer, undertaking not to repeat the offence in future, without conceding or admiEng guilt, and in such language as may be prescribed by this Hon’ble Court. The appellant’s counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi2ons and contends that pre-trial incarcera2on would cause an irreversible injus2ce to the pe22oner and his family. 8. State as well as counsel for the complainant strongly oppose the bail and refers to the status report. REASONING: 9. Given the undertaking by counsel for the pe22oner that pe22oner will not repeat the offence in future, there would be no jus2fiability for custodial or pre-trial incarcera2on at this stage. Even a primafacie perusal of paragraphs 5 & 6 of the grounds of appeal needs considera2on for bail. 10. In Siva v. State, Crl.A. No.46 of 2024, decided on 01 Feb 2024, Jus2ce M. Nirmal Kumar of Madras High Court, while gran2ng bail, imposed the following condi2on, [6] …AIer execu2ng all the sure2es within 15 days from coming out of prison, the appellants shall file affidavit before the concerned Court which reads as follows: JYOTI 2025.07.08 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1819-2025 3 “I, as a Ci2zen of India, having utmost faith in the Cons2tu2on of India, am quite aware that 'Untouchability' has been abolished under our Cons2tu2on. I, hereby, take pledge that knowingly or unknowingly, I will not prac2ce social discrimina2on based on untouchability either by words or deeds or in any other manner. I am aware that it is my duty to serve in a true, honest and faithful manner, as per the basic principles laid down under the Cons2tu2on, to create an independent Society, without any discrimina2on. I solemnly affirm that this would stand to speak forever the faith I have in the Indian Cons2tu2on.” 11. The pe22oner is also directed to hand over two affidavits, in the same terms, aPested by any Execu2ve Magistrate or Notarized, to the concerned SHO within two weeks, one copy for the case file and one for the vic2m. 12. The possibility of the accused influencing the inves2ga2on, tampering with evidence, in2mida2ng witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing jus2ce, can be taken care of by imposing elabora2ve and stringent condi2ons. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020:INSC:106 [Para 92], (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the Cons2tu2onal Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restric2ve condi2ons. 13. Without commen2ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men2oned above, the Appellant-Accused makes a case for bail. 14. Given above, provided the Appellant-Accused is not required in any other case, the Appellant-Accused shall be released on bail in the FIR cap2oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa2sfac2on of the Arres2ng Officer, and if the maPer is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep2ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa2sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 15. While furnishing a personal bond, the Appellant-Accused shall men2on the following personal iden2fica2on details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number, (If available), when the aPes2ng officer/court thinks appropriate or considers the accused as a flight risk. JYOTI 2025.07.08 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1819-2025 4 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 16. This order is subject to the Appellant-Accused’s complying with the following terms. The Appellant-Accused shall abide by all statutory bond condi2ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The Appellant-Accused 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. 17. The Appellant-Accused is directed to join the inves/ga/on 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 Inves/gator. The Appellant-Accused shall be in deemed custody for Sec2on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec2on 23 of BSA, 2023. The Appellant-Accused shall join the inves2ga2on as and when called by the Inves2ga2ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves2ga2on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu2on will be open to seeking cancella2on of the bail. During the inves2ga2on, the Appellant-Accused shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 18. Given the nature of the allega2ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the Appellant-Accused shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the vic2m un2l the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condi2on to rule out any aPempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the vic2m. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Inves2ga2on, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna BhaP v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. 19. This order does not, in any manner, limit or restrict the rights of the Police or the inves2ga2ng agency from further inves2ga2on as per law. 20. In case the Inves2gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta2on arraigns another sec2on of any penal offence in this FIR, and if the new sec2on prescribes maximum sentence which is not greater than the sec2ons men2oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec2on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec2ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec2ons men2oned above, then, in that case, the Inves2gator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the appellant no2ces of a minimum of seven JYOTI 2025.07.08 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1819-2025 5 days providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 21. It is clarified that if the Appellant-Accused violates any bail condi2on, the State and/or the vic2m may file an applica2on for bail cancella2on before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more condi2ons. Furthermore, if the Appellant-Accused move for dele2on or dilu2on of any bail condi2ons, the trial court is empowered to do so. 22. This bail is condi/onal, and the founda/onal condi/on is that if the Appellans- Accused indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applica/on for cancella/on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 23. Any observa2on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 24. In return for the protec2on from incarcera2on, the Court believes that the accused shall also reciprocate through desirable behavior. 25. A cer2fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Appellant-Accused can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aPest it to be a true copy. If the aPes2ng officer wants to verify its authen2city, such an officer can also verify its authen2city and may download and use the downloaded copy for aPes2ng bonds. Appeal allowed in aforesaid terms. All pending applica2ons, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 03.07.2025 Jyo2-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes No. JYOTI 2025.07.08 09:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.
Arguments
Mr. Naveen Kumar Sheoran, D.A.G., Haryana. Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate and Mr. Sagar Aggarwal, Advocate, for the complainant. **** FIR No. Dated Police Sta.on Sec.ons 131 08.05.2025 Babain 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sec2ons 3 (1) (R)(S), 3 (2) (va) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 Aggrieved by the dismissal of his bail under sec2on 482 BNSS, 2023, the accused- appellant has come up before this court by filing an appeal under sec2on 14-A of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Preven2on of Atroci2es) Act, 1989, (SCSTPOA), seeking an2cipatory bail. 2. The appellant had filed a bail applica2on before the Addi2onal Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra which was dismissed on 22.05.2025. 3. In Prathvi Raj v. Union of India, 2020:INSC:157 [Para 10], AIR 2020 SC 1036, a three-judge bench of Supreme Court read down S. 18 by declaring as follows,