Allowed

Puneet Mittal and Another v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Dec 2023CRM-M/59952/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to accused persons challenging under Section 439 CrPC in a corruption case. The court imposed stringent conditions, including furnishing a personal bond or fixed deposit, and restricting the use of non-Aadhar linked mobile numbers during the trial, citing principles from Supreme Court judgments regarding economic offenses and bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioners on conditions including furnishing personal bond or fixed deposit and restriction to one mobile number linked to Aadhar card during trial.

Puneet Mittal and Another Vs State of Punjab — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

220

¶4

CRM-M-59952-2023 Date of Decision: 12.12.2023

¶5

Puneet Mi�al and another

...Pe��oners

Versus

State of Punjab

…Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶11

Present: Mr. R.S. Cheema, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ishan Khetarpal, Advocate for the pe��oners.

¶12

Mr. Ravinder Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

¶13

****

¶14

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶15

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta-on	Sec-ons
6	07.06.2018	Vigilance Bureau,	409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 120-
		Flying Squad-1,	B IPC and 13(1) (d) read with
		Punjab, Mohali	Sec�on 13(2) of Preven�on of
			Corrup�on Act, 1988

¶16

The pe��oners, incarcerated upon their arrest in the FIR cap�oned above, have come up before this Court under Sec�on 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.

¶17

In paragraph 16 of the bail applica�on, pe��oner No. 1 declares that he has no criminal antecedents, however pe��oner no. 2 declares the following criminal antecedents:

¶18

Sr. No.	FIR No.	Date	Offen	fces
1.	2	20.02.2018	409,	420, 465, 465,
			471,	120-B IPC and
			13(1) Act	(d), 13(2) of PC

¶19

Pe��oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi�ons and are also voluntarily agreeable to the condi�on that �ll the conclusion of the trial, the pe��oners shall keep only one mobile number, which is men�oned in AADHAR card, if any, and within fi@een days undertakes to disconnect all other mobile numbers. The

¶20

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶21

¶22

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶23

pe��oners contend that the further pre-trial incarcera�on would cause an irreversible injus�ce to the pe��oners and family.

¶24

The state's counsel opposes the bail and states that considering the allega�ons and criminal history of pe��oner No. 2, they are not en�tled for bail.

¶25

The role of the pe��oners are specifically stated in reply filed by State dated 11.12.2023 which reads as follows:

¶26

“That en�re amount of above men�oned 5 cheques was drawn into the accounts of the pe��oners and the pe��oners a�er receiving the above said amounts failed to supply the required material i.e. Proceedings Registers, cash books, Stock registers etc. and books of Punjab Panchaya� Raj Act and other materials to the Block office and the complete amount of public money was usurped by the pe��oners is connivance with Ja�nderpal Singh Dhillon, Block Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Execu�ve Officer, Panchayat Sami�, Kharar and Resham Singh, Chairman, Panchayat Sami� Kharar and all the above said in connivance with each other caused financial loss to the tune of Rs. 47,60,021/- to the Government and caused illegal gain for themselves”.

¶27

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

¶28

[10] It is not in dispute and highlighted that the second respondent is a siEng Member of Parliament facing several criminal cases. It is also not in dispute that most of the cases ended in acqui�al 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.

¶29

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 acqui�al 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

¶30

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶31

¶32

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶33

and not the criminal, yet for a recidivist, the contours of a playing field are marshy, and graver the criminal history, slushier the puddles.

¶34

As per paragraph 11 of the bail pe��on, the pe��oners are in custody since 13.09.2023. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie 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 pe��oner No. 2 is not being considered strictly at this stage as a factor for denying bail.

¶35

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

¶36

[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.

¶37

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.

¶38

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��oners make 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.

¶39

In Madhu Tanwar. v. State of Punjab, 2023:PHHC:077618 [Para 10, 21] , CRM-M27097-2023, decided on 29-05-2023, this court observed,

¶40

[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

¶41

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶42

¶43

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶44

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.

¶45

[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 fiEng 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.

¶46

Given above, provided the pe��oners are not required in any other case, the pe��oners shall be released on bail in the FIR cap�oned above, in the following terms :

¶47

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

¶48

(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 court must sa�sfy that if the accused fails to appear in court, then such surety can produce the accused before the court.

¶49

¶50

(b). Pe��oners 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 dra@ favouring concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for a similar amount.

¶51

(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.

¶52

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶53

¶54

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶55

(d). The pe��oners are to also execute a bond for a�endance 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 order.

¶56

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

¶57

1.	AADHAR number
2.	Passport number, (If available), when the court a�es�ng the bonds thinks appropriate or considers the accused as a flight risk.
3.	Mobile number (If available)
4.	E-Mail id (If available)

¶58

The pe��oners 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��oners 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��oners fail 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��oners are directed not to keep more than one prepaid SIM, i.e., one pre-paid 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

¶61

numbers. The pe��oners must comply with this condi�on within fi@een 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��oners, 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

¶62

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶63

¶64

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶65

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 pe��oner’s AADHAR details or any other source, for which they shall be legally en�tled 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.”

¶66

During the trial's pendency, if the pe��oners repeat or commit 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 a@er that in Sec�on 437-A of the Cr.P.C., if not canceled due to non-appearance or breach of condi�ons.

¶67

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 an opportunity to the vic�m to consider legal remedies for recovery of the amount. 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 Three-Judge 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.”

¶68

Any Advocate for the pe��oners 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.

¶69

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶70

¶71

CRM-M-59952-2023 2023:PHHC:159161

¶72

If the pe��oners find 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 a@er 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.

¶73

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.

¶74

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

¶75

There would be no need for a cer�fied copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe��oners can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a9est it to be a true copy. In case the a9es�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 a9es�ng bonds.

¶76

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

¶77

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 12.12.2023 Jyo�-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No .

¶78

JYOTI 2023.12.13 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶79

Puneet Mittal and Another v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puneet Mittal and Another v. State of Punjab

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

Arvind Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Pavittar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Chaittnya Aggarwal Vs State of U.T. Chd. and Others

Malkeet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sukha Singh @ Surjit Singh (Minor) Vs State of Punjab

Ravi Vs State of Haryana