Mohit @ Mohit Dalal v. State of Haryana

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 378 11.12.2024 Badli, Bahadurgarh, 190, 193(3), 115, 126, 287, 351(3), Dis1. Jhajjar 110, 117(2) of BNS and Sectons (Haryana) 25/54/59 of Arms Act

¶1The pettoner apprehending arrest in the FIR captoned above has come up before this Court under Secton 482 of Bharatya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking antcipatory bail.

¶2In paragraph 12 of the bail petton, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶3The facts of the case are being taken from translated copy of FIR annexed with bail petton as Annexure P-1, which reads as follows: "To SHO sahab, Police Staton Badli. Sir, I request that I Devendra S/o Ramesh, is resident of village Jakhoda, district Jhajjar and doing the work of agriculture. We are two brothers. I am the elder one and the younger one is Ravindra. On 10.12.2024, Mohit S/o Ramesh of village Jakhoda from our village was scheduled to get married in village Badli. I and my brother Ravindra le. for Badli in our respectve vehicles at around 7 in the evening for the wedding. We reached the wedding at around 7:45, there order/judgment. 1 some quarrel had taken place between the boys of the village. Everyone was pacified and sent back home. Ravindra had also le. the wedding venue in his vehicle, in the meantme four-five vehicles came and blocked the way by stopping in front of Ravindra's vehicle and Ravindra was alighted from the car. Mohit S/o Jogendra from my own village fired three shots in the air. Along with Mohit, Suraj, Mohit, Rakesh, Golu S/o Leela, Mohit Lathar village Goyala Kalan and 15 to 20 other boys a;acked Ravindra with stcks. They said that Ravindra be killed. Their nephew Golu is also included in this. They have inflicted many injuries to Ravindra. Then somehow by intervening, Ravindra was brought to Badli Golden Global Hospital. From there he was brought to Sanjeevani Hospital Bahadurgarh. Here, a.er waitng, an applicaton has been submi;ed that legal acton should be taken against all of them."

¶4The pettoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditons and contends that further pre-trial incarceraton would cause an irreversible injustce to the pettoner and his family and refer para No. 6 of the petton which reads as follows:- "6. That it is relevant to submit that the injured was taken to a private hospital for treatment and not in the government hospital intentonally by the complainant party. Moreover the complainant party disclosed to the doctor that the injured received injuries by some unknown persons and the doctor has also mentoned that the injured was heavily drunk when he was brought in the hospital. Some scuffle has taken place between the residents of the village in the marriage and the pettoner has falsely being implicated in the FIR."

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail based on instructons. Complainant also opposes the bail. REASONING:

¶6A scuffle has taken place between the villagers in a marriage and allegatons against the pettoner are that he has fired three gun shots in the air. However, no bullet injury is there and no injury has been a1ributed to him.

¶7Pre-trial incarceraton should not be a replica of post-convicton sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuton or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of antcipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justfy custodial interrogaton or pre-order/judgment. 2 trial incarceraton.

¶8Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegatons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justfiability for custodial interrogaton or the pre-trial incarceraton at this stage.

¶9Without commentng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentoned above, the pettoner makes a case for bail. CONDITIONS:

¶10Given above, provided the pettoner is not required in any other case, the pettoner shall be released on bail in the FIR captoned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satsfacton of the Arrestng Officer, and if the ma1er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before acceptng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satsfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶11While furnishing a personal bond, the pettoner shall menton the following personal identficaton details:

¶1AADHAR number

¶2Passport number (If available) and when the a1estng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶12This order is subject to the pettoner's complying with the following terms. The pettoner shall abide by all statutory bond conditons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pettoner 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.

¶13The pettoner is directed to join the investgaton 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 Investgator. The pettoner shall be in deemed custody for Secton 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Secton 23 of BSA, 2023. The pettoner shall join the investgaton as and when called by the Investgatng Officer or any Superior Officer order/judgment. 3 and shall cooperate with the investgaton at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecuton will be open to seeking cancellaton of the bail. During the investgaton, the pettoner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶14Given the nature of the allegatons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pettoner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victm untl the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this conditon to rule out any a1empt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victm. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investgaton, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bha1 v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

¶15Given the background of allegatons against the pettoner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitatng the accused would be one of the primary optons untl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui1al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This restricton 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 sancton]. Given the nature of the allegatons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pettoner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuniton, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiOeen days and inform the Investgator of the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pettoner shall be enttled to renew and reclaim them in case of acqui1al in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restrictng firearms would instll confidence in the victm(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeatng the offense.

¶16The conditons mentoned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petton (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 conditons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditons that would result in the deprivaton of rights and libertes must be eschewed." order/judgment. 4

¶17In case the Investgator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Staton arraigns another secton of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new secton prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sectons mentoned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added secton(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sectons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sectons mentoned above; then, in that case, the Investgator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pettoner notce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶18It is clarified that if the pettoner violates any bail conditon, the State and/or the victm may file an applicaton for bail cancellaton before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditons. Furthermore, if the pettoner moves for deleton or diluton of any bail conditons, the trial court is empowered to do so.

¶19This bail is condi#onal, and the founda#onal condi#on is that if the pe##oner 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.

¶20The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above conditons and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law.

¶21Any observaton made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶22A certfied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pettoner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a1est it to be a true copy. If the a1estng officer wants to verify its authentcity, such an officer can also verify its authentcity and may download and use the downloaded copy for a1estng bonds.

¶23Petition allowed in terms mentoned above. All pending applicatons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

28.02.2025 Jyoti-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 17.02.2025 Pronounced on: 28.02.2025 Mohit @ Mohit Dalal ...Pettoner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Ajay Ghangas, Advocate, For the pettoner. Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate, for the complainant. ****