Allowed

Amit Kumar v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Nov 2023CRM-M/23945/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the petitioner, a Village Secretary accused of misappropriation and cheque forgery. The Court rejected strict consideration of criminal antecedents at this stage but granted bail subject to stringent conditions including surrendering all prepaid SIMs except one linked to the Aadhaar and paying a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- or a fixed deposit/blocking of funds, and one surety. Strict condition imposed: accused to possess only one prepaid SI

Amit Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶2

208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-23945-2023 Reserved on: 17.11.2023 Pronounced on: 21.11.2023

Amit Kumar

...Pe!!oner

Versus

State of Haryana …Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶9

Present: Mr. Babbar Bhan, Advocate for the pe!!oner.

¶10

Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶11

****

¶12

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶13

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta	!on	Sec!ons
49	14.03.2022	Jhojhu	Kalan,	409, 420, 467, 468, 471,
		District	Charkhi	120-B and 201 IPC
		Dadri

¶14

The pe!!oner incarcerated in the FIR cap!oned above has come up before this Court under Sec!on 439 CrPC seeking bail.

¶15

In the bail applica!on, the pe!!oner is silent about criminal antecedents, however,

¶16

as per Custody Cer!ficate, pe!!oner has following criminal antecedent:-

¶17

FIR No.	Date	Offences	Police Sta!on
60	17.03.2023	409, 120-B, 201 IPC	Jhojhu Kalan,
			Charkhi Dadri

¶18

Pe!!oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi!ons and states that they would have no objec!on to the condi!ons, i.e., surrender of weapons and are also voluntarily agreeable to the condi!on that !ll the conclusion of the trial, the pe!!oner shall keep only one mobile number, which is men!oned in AADHAR card, if any, and within fiBeen days undertakes to disconnect all other mobile numbers. The pe!!oner contends that the further pre-trial incarcera!on would cause an irreversible injus!ce to the pe!!oner and family.

¶19

The State opposes bail. The state also submits that the pe!!oner has paid Rs.91,06,540/- lacs out of the alleged amount of Rs.1,08,97,756/-. If he is released on bail, he may indulge in crime again.

¶20

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶21

-1-

¶22

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶23

The facts of the case are taken from the status report dated 13.10.2023 which reads as under:-

¶24

“That brief facts in the present ma�er are that a case FIR No.49 dated 14.03.2022 under sec ons 409/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC and 201 IPC PS Jhojhu Kalan was registered on the complaint submi�ed by Subhash Chander Sharma, BDPO, Jhojhu, sta ng therein that Amit Kumar, Village Secretary (Present Pe oner) in collusion with other persons had misappropriated total amount of Rs.1,08,97,756/- (One Crore Eight Lakh Ninety Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Fi>y Six) by forging his signatures on the cheques, resolu ons etc. illegally using the digital signatures and the said amount was transferred in the accounts of various firms in collusion with the bank officials, proprietors of the firm and other persons and neither handed over the Gram Panchayats records despite being repeatedly asked to do so.”

¶25

In Maulana Mohd Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P., (2012) 3 SCC 382, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,

¶26

[10] It is not in dispute and highlighted that the second respondent is a siIng Member of Parliament facing several criminal cases. It is also not in dispute that most of the cases ended in acquiKal for want of proper witnesses or pending trial. As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdic!on of the Court etc.

¶27

While considering each bail pe!!on of the accused with a criminal history, it throws an onerous responsibility upon the Courts to act judiciously with reasonableness because arbitrariness is the an!thesis of law. The criminal history must be of cases where the accused was convicted, including the suspended sentences and all pending First Informa!on Reports, wherein the bail pe!!oner stands arraigned as an accused. In reckoning the number of cases as criminal history, the prosecu!ons resul!ng in acquiKal or discharge, or when Courts quashed the FIR; the prosecu!on stands withdrawn, or prosecu!on filed a closure report; cannot be included. Although crime is to be despised and not the criminal, yet for a recidivist, the contours of a playing field are marshy, and graver the criminal history, slushier the puddles.

¶28

In Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Inves!ga!on, (2012) 1 SCC 40, Supreme

¶29

Court holds,

¶30

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶31

-2-

¶32

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶33

[28] We are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged with economic offences of huge magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardize the economy of the country. At the same !me, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the inves!ga!ng agency has already completed inves!ga!on and the charge sheet is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further inves!ga!on. We are of the view that the appellants are en!tled to the grant of bail pending trial on stringent condi!ons in order to ally the apprehension expressed by CBI.

¶34

As per paragraph No.4 of the bail pe!!on, the pe!!oner is in custody since 08.02.2023. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allega!ons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus!fiability further pre-trial incarcera!on at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and condi!ons men!oned in this order. Thus, the previous criminal history of the pe!!oner is not being considered strictly at this stage as a factor for denying bail.

¶35

The possibility of the accused influencing the inves!ga!on, tampering with evidence, in!mida!ng witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing jus!ce, can be taken care of by imposing elabora!ve and stringent condi!ons. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020:INSC:106 [Para 92] , (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the Cons!tu!onal Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restric!ve condi!ons.

¶36

Without commen!ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men!oned above, the pe!!oner makes a case for bail, subject to the following terms and condi!ons, which shall be over and above and irrespec!ve of the contents of the form of bail bonds in chapter XXXIII of CrPC, 1973.

¶37

In Madhu Tanwar and Anr. v. State of Punjab, 2023:PHHC:077618 [Para 10, 21] , CRM-M-27097-2023, decided on 29-05-2023, this court observed,

¶38

[10] The exponen!al growth in technology and ar!ficial intelligence has transformed iden!fica!on techniques remarkably. Voice, gait, and facial recogni!on are incredibly sophis!cated and pervasive. Impersona!on, as we know it tradi!onally, has virtually become impossible. Thus, the remedy lies that whenever a judge or an officer believes that the accused might be a flight risk or has a history of fleeing from jus!ce, then in such cases, appropriate condi!ons can be inserted that all the expenditure that shall be incurred to trace them, shall be recovered from such person, and the State shall have a lien over their assets to make good the loss.

¶39

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶40

-3-

¶41

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶42

[21] In this era when the knowledge revolu!on has just begun, to keep pace with exponen!al and unimaginable changes the technology has brought to human lives, it is only fiIng that the dependence of the accused on surety is minimized by giving alterna!ve op!ons. Furthermore, there should be no insistence to provide permanent addresses when people either do not have permanent abodes or intend to re-locate.

¶43

Given above, provided the pe!!oner is not required in any other case, the pe!!oner shall be released on bail in the FIR cap!oned above, in the following terms :

¶44

(a). Pe!!oner to furnish personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/); AND

¶45

(b) To give one surety of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/-), to the sa!sfac!on of the concerned court, and in case of non-availability, to any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep!ng the surety, the concerned officer/court must sa!sfy that if the accused fails to appear in court, then such surety can produce the accused before the court.

¶46

¶47

(b). Pe!!oner to hand over to the concerned court a fixed deposit for Rs. Ten thousand only (INR 10,000/-), with the clause of automa!c renewal of the principal and the interest rever!ng to the linked account, made in favor of the ‘Chief Judicial Magistrate’ of the concerned district, or blocking the aforesaid amount in favour of the concerned ‘Chief Judicial Magistrate’. Said fixed deposit or blocking funds can be from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 50% or from any of the well-established and stable private sector banks. In case the bankers are not willing to make a Fixed Deposit in such eventuality it shall be permissible for the pe!!oner to prepare an account payee demand draB favouring concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for a similar amount. (c). Such court shall have a lien over the funds un!l the case's closure or discharged by subs!tu!on, or up to the expiry of the period men!oned under S. 437-A CrPC, 1973, and at that stage, subject to the proceedings under S. 446 CrPC, the en!re amount of fixed deposit, less taxes if any, shall be endorsed/returned to the depositor.

¶48

(d). The pe!!oner is to also execute a bond for aKendance in the concerned court(s) as and when asked to do so. The presenta!on of the personal bond shall be deemed acceptance of the declara!ons made in the bail pe!!on and all other s!pula!ons, terms, and condi!ons of sec!on 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and of this bail

¶49

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

-4-

CRM-M-23945-2023

order.

(e). While furnishing personal bond, the pe!!oner shall men!on the following personal iden!fica!on details:

¶54

AADHAR number

¶55

Passport number, (If available), when the aKes!ng officer/court thinks appropriate or considers the accused as a flight risk.

¶56

Mobile number (If available)

¶57

E-Mail id (If available)

¶58

The pe!!oner shall not influence, browbeat, pressurize, make any inducement, threat, or promise, directly or indirectly, to the witnesses, the Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and the circumstances of the case, to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police, or the Court, or to tamper with the evidence.

¶59

Pe!!oner to comply with their undertaking made in the bail pe!!on, made before this court through counsel as reflected at the beginning of this order. If the pe!!oner fails to comply with any of such undertakings, then on this ground alone, the bail might be canceled, and the vic!m/complainant may file any such applica!on for the cancella!on of bail, and the State shall file the said applica!on.

¶60

The pe!!oner is directed not to keep more than one prepaid SIM, i.e., one prepaid mobile phone number, !ll the conclusion of the trial; however, this restric!on is only on prepaid SIMs [mobile numbers] and not on post-paid connec!ons or landline numbers. The pe!!oner must comply with this condi!on within fiBeen days of release from prison. The concerned DySP shall also direct all the telecom service providers to deac!vate all prepaid SIM cards and prepaid mobile numbers issued to the pe!!oner, except the one that is men!oned as the primary number/ default number linked with the AADHAAR card and further that !ll the no objec!on from the concerned SHO, the mobile service providers shall not issue second pre-paid SIM/ mobile number in the pe!!oner’s name. Since, as on date, in India, there are only four prominent mobile service providers, namely BSNL, Airtel, Vodafone-Idea, and Reliance Jio, any other telecom service provider are directed to comply with the direc!ons of the concerned Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police, issued in this regard and disable all prepaid mobile phone numbers issued in the name of the pe!!oner, except the main number/default number linked with AADHAR, by taking such informa!on from the Jyoti Sharma2023.11.21 16:16 pe!!oner’s AADHAR details or any other source, for which they shall be legally en!tled I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh -5-

¶61

-5-

¶62

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶63

by this order. This condi!on shall con!nue !ll the comple!on of the trial or closure of the case, whichever is earlier. In Vernon v. The State of Maharashtra, 2023 INSC 655 , [para 45], while gran!ng bail under Unlawful Ac!vi!es (Preven!on) Act, 2002, Supreme Court had directed imposi!on of the similar condi!on, which reads as follows, “(d) Both the appellants shall use only one Mobile Phone each, during the !me they remain on bail and shall inform the Inves!ga!ng Officer of the NIA, their respec!ve mobile numbers.”

¶64

During the trial's pendency, if the pe!!oner repeats or commits any offence where the sentence prescribed is more than seven years or violates any condi!on as s!pulated in this order, it shall always be permissible to the respondent to apply for cancella!on of this bail. It shall further be open for any inves!ga!ng agency to bring it to the no!ce of the Court seized of the subsequent applica!on that the accused was earlier cau!oned not to indulge in criminal ac!vi!es. Otherwise, the bail bonds shall remain in force throughout the trial and aBer that in Sec!on 437-A of the Cr.P.C., if not canceled due to non-appearance or breach of condi!ons.

¶65

The condi!ons men!oned above imposed by this Court are to endeavour that the accused tries to reform, does not repeat the offence, and to provide a sense of security to the vic!m. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi , 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28] , Writ Pe!!on (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A ThreeJudge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail condi!ons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be propor!onal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts while imposing bail condi!ons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condi!ons that would result in the depriva!on of rights and liber!es must be eschewed.”

¶66

Any Advocate for the pe!!oner and the Officer in whose presence the pe!!oner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all condi!ons of this bail order in any language that the pe!!oner understands.

¶67

If the pe!!oner finds the bond amount beyond social and financial reach, it may be brought to the no!ce of this Court for appropriate reduc!on. Further, if the pe!!oner finds bail condi!on(s) as viola!ng fundamental, human, or other rights, or causing difficulty due to any situa!on, then for modifica!on of such term(s), the pe!!oner may file a reasoned applica!on before this Court, and aBer taking cognizance, even to the Court taking cognizance or the trial Court, as the case may be, and such Court shall also be competent to modify or delete any condi!on.

¶68

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶69

-6-

¶70

CRM-M-23945-2023

¶71

Any observa!on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶72

In return for the protec!on from incarcera!on, the Court believes that the accused shall also reciprocate through desirable behavior.

¶73

The SHO of the concerned police sta!on or the inves!ga!ng officer shall arrange to send a copy of this order, preferably a soB copy, to the complainant and the vic!m, without any delay. If the vic!m(s) no!ce any viola!on of this order, they may inform the SHO of the concerned police sta!on, the trial court, or even this court.

¶74

There would be no need for a cer fied copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a�est it to be a true copy. In case the a�es ng officer wants to verify the authen city, such an officer can also verify its authen city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a�es ng bonds.

¶75

Pe&&on allowed in aforesaid terms . All pending applica!ons, if any, stand disposed.

¶76

21.11.2023		(ANOOP CHITKARA)
Jyo! Sharma		JUDGE
	Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes
	Whether reportable	: No

¶77

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.21 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶78

-7-

Amit Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jaspinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sarabjit Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Harbir Alias Kachhua Alias Mannu Vs State of Haryana

Manjeet Kaur Gill Vs State of Punjab

Dalip Singh Gill Vs State of Haryana and Others