The High Court
Case Details
CRM-M-34774-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34774-2025 Reserved on: 11.07.2025 Pronounced on: 30.07.2025 Sadam @ Irfan @ Faan State of Haryana Versus ...Petitioner …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Harpreet Kaur, A.A.G., Haryana. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. ****
Legal Reasoning
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 29 20.01.2025 Ellenabad, District Sirsa 304, 309(4), 311, 238(c) of BNS and 25 of Arms Act 1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail. 2. In paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the petitioner’s counsel submits lack of instructions regarding petitioner’s criminal antecedents. However, as per custody certificate dated 10.07.2025, the petitioner has following criminal antecedents: FIR No. 27 Dated 20.01.2025 Sec(cid:15)ons 304, 311, 309(4) BNS, 25/54/59 of Arms Act Police Sta(cid:15)on Ellenabad, Sirsa 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the translated copy of FIR (Annexure P-1) which reads as follows: “To SHO PS Ellenabad. Sub: For taking legal action after recording a rapat against the persons who looted the liquor shop on the gun point by beating. Sir, it is requested that I Vinod Kumar s/o Balram Yadav of the permanent resident of Lahori District Gaya Bihar. I am a peaceful and law abiding citizen. I work as salesman at the Liquor shop of Himmat Kumar and company at Dhani Shera. On the night of 20.01.2025 at around 3.15 AM, two unknown persons came to my liquor shop at Dhani Shera on motorcycle and they were carrying pistol in their hands. They firstly gave beatings to me and lateron, after pointing a pistol at me, took away the liquor worth of Rs. 15000/- which they removed from money box JYOTI 2025.07.30 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 1 CRM-M-34774-2025 after giving beatings to me and I was made hostage inside the liquor shop and took away the key with them. It is requested to you that legal action be taken against the two unknown persons who looted the liquor shop after giving beatings to me. You are highly obliged.” 4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State may file an application to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and may do so at their discretion, to which the petitioner shall have no objection. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail on instructions. REASONING: 7. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. Per paragraph 11 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since 19.02.2025. Per the custody certificate dated 10.07.2025, the petitioner’s total custody in this FIR is 04 months and 21 days. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for further pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 8. 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. 9. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 10. 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 JYOTI 2025.07.30 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 2 CRM-M-34774-2025 attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 11.
Legal Reasoning
This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. 12. 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. 13. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, 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 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 of release from prison 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. 14. The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense and also to block the menace of drug abuse. 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.” 15. In Md. Tajiur Rahaman v. The State of West Bengal, decided on 08-Nov-2024, SLP (Crl) 12225-2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds in Para 7, “It goes without saying that if the petitioner is found involved in such like offence in future, the concession of JYOTI 2025.07.30 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 3 CRM-M-34774-2025 bail granted to him today will liable to be withdrawn and the petitioner is bound to face the necessary consequences.” 16. The significant consideration for granting bail is that the Court aims to give the petitioner another chance to course-correct, reform, and reintegrate into the community as an ideal citizen. To ensure that the petitioner also abides by the assurance made on the petitioner’s behalf by not repeating the offence or indulging in any crime, it shall be desirable to impose the following additional condition. 17. This bail is conditional, with the foundational condition being that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State shall file an application to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and as per their discretion, they may cancel this bail. 18. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 19. 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. 20. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
Decision
stand disposed of. 30.07.2025 Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE JYOTI 2025.07.30 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 4