Allowed

Krishna Shakya v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Aug 2024CRM-M/37354/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by an accused nominated on a co-accused's disclosure statement in an FIR concerning a missing girl and alleged Aadhaar card changes. The Court found prima facie evidence but, considering custody duration and nature of allegations, granted bail subject to bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on regular bail in FIR No.526 dated 01.12.2023, PS Chandimandir, subject to furnishing bonds and conditions.

Krishna Shakya Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-37354-2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-37354-2024

¶4

Reserved on: 09.08.2024 Pronounced on: 30.08.2024

Krishna Shakya

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana …Respondent

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶10

Present: Mr. Dhananjay Singh, Advocate and Mr. Abhijeet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶14

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Sections
526	01.12.2023	Chandimandir,	365 IPC (Sections 120-B,
		Panchkula	420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 201,
		(Haryana)	420 IPC, 66-D of IT Act and
			34 to 41 of Aadhar Act added later on)

¶15

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.

¶16

2. In paragraph 11 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶17

The facts and allegations are being taken from para 2 of the bail petition, which reads as follows:-

¶18

“2. That as per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant who is a resident of village Madanpura, District Panchkula, Haryana had moved an application/complaint that his daughter namely Babli had been missing from her home and could not be located by the family. He further alleged that he suspects that his daughter had eloped with another girl from their neighbourhood namely Kajal. As a sequence to the above received complaint. the Police registered a case under Section 346 IPC. The present Petitioner is nowhere named in the FIR. and as such he had been nominated on the disclosure statement of Co-

¶19

Jyoti Sharma 2024.08.30 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶20

¶21

CRM-M-37354-2024

¶22

accused namely Prem Das, who had been instrumental in helping the aforesaid girls to get changes in their Adhaar card.”

¶23

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.

¶24

State’s counsel opposes bail.

¶25

There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, as per para no.4 of order dated 06.07.2024 passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, the petitioner has been in custody since 27-032024. 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, subject to the compliance of terms and conditions mentioned in this order.

¶26

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. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶27

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.

¶28

While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

¶29

1.	AADHAR number
2.	Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.
3.	Mobile number (If available)
4.	E-Mail id (If available)

¶30

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.

¶31

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the

¶32

Jyoti Sharma 2024.08.30 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶33

¶34

CRM-M-37354-2024

¶35

case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶36

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.

¶37

Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶38

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶39

30.08.2024 Jyoti Sharma

¶40

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

¶41

Jyoti Sharma 2024.08.30 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶42

Krishna Shakya v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Shakya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamaljit Kaur Alias Kamaljeet Kaur Alias Kamla Vs State of Punjab

Atul Kumar Goel Vs M/S Surinder Kumar Krishan Chand

Balvir Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Another

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ankit Vs State of Haryana

Sukhdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab