Rajnish Alias Rajneesh Kumar v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta2on Sec2ons 122 13.08.2024 City Khanna, 61 (2), 235, 242, 246, 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), District Khanna 337, 338, 340(2) of BNS, 2023

¶1The pe!!oner apprehending arrest in the FIR cap!oned above has come up before this Court under Sec!on 482 of Bhara!ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking an!cipatory bail.

¶2In paragraph 17 of the bail pe!!on, the accused declares that the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offenses Police Sta-2on

¶1145 04.09.2022 392, 419, 342, 395, 170, 171, 411 Sadar Khanna IPC and Sec!ons 25, 27 of Arms Act

¶3The facts and allega!ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: "3. That the brief facts of the case are that a le:er no. 76 dated

24.07.2024 from Mrs. Prabhjol Kaur, JMIC, Khanna was received in Police Sta'on P.S. City-1 Khanna for registra'on of case against the pe''oner, his wife Manju and unnamed persons, the contents of which are as follows, "From Prabhjot Kaur, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Khanna. To The SHO, P.S. City-1 Khanna (Through Proper Channel), Subject :- For registra'on of criminal case against:-1. Rajnish Kumar son of Jagdish Kumar, resident of Ward No. 13, Jain Street, Jira, District Ferozpur. 2. Manju W/o Rajnish Kumar, resident of Ward No.13, Jain Street, Zira, District Ferozpur. 3. Unknown Persons. Memo:- Whereas in case bearing order/judgment. 1 FIR No.145 dated 04.09.2022 u/s 419, 342, 392, 395, 170, 171, 411 IPC and Sec'on 25, 27 Arms Act, PS Sadar Khanna, the accused Rajnish Kumar son of Jagdish Kumar was ordered to be released on ball, on furnishing of personal bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two local sure'es in the like amount vide order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the court of Sh. Manoj Kumar Ld. Addi'onal Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. ThereaAer, on 05.12.2022 the bail bonds and surely bonds were furnished in favour of accused Rajnish Kumar by one person namely Rajwant Singh son of Harchand Singh, resident of Village Kishangarh qua property falling within Khewat No.98/95, khatauni No.14, Khasra No.12, 14, 16, 18 as per jamabandi for the year 2018-19. The said surety was iden'fied by Manju W/o Rajnish Kumar and Daler Singh, S/o Pala Singh, resident of Village Kishangarh. Aadhar Card bearing no. 6504 2656 0849 belonging to the said Rajwant Singh was also placed on record alongwith the Aadhar cards of the iden'fiers. Resultantly, accused Rajnish Kumar was released from custody. However, an applica'on was moved on 09.02.2023 by Rajwant Singh son of Harchand Singh, resident of Village Mehndipur bearing Aadhar Card No.3476 7241 9121 to the effect that some person impersona'ng himself to be Rajwant Singh furnished ball bonds and surely bonds on behalf of accused Rajnish Kumar. He submi:ed that he had never furnished surely bonds for any accused in any court of law. The applicant also filed an affidavit in this regard and produced in the court his original iden'ty proof in the form of his passport, aadhar card, voter card, PAN card, cer'fied copy of jamabandi for the year 2018-19 and bank passbook of HDFC Bank in support of his applica'on. Upon this applica'on, this court issued no'ces to Manju and Daler Singh and direc'ons were issued to learned counsel for the accused Rajnish Kumar to produce in the court the surety, iden'fier and witnesses alongwith original documents. No'ce issued to witness Daler Singh was received back with the report of Sarpanch that no such person is residing in the village Kishangarh and that his name is also not men'oned in voter list. ThereaAer on 01.05.2023, wife of accused Manju appeared in the court and filed an affidavit vide which she stated that the accused was ordered to furnish local surety bonds vide order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the court of Sh. Manoj Kumar. Ld. ADJ Ludhiana, but she cannot arrange sufficient surety for his release. However, she submi:ed that she met one unknown person namely Surjit Singh outside the court premises who agreed to help her and to procure JYOTI local surety for her. She accordingly submi:ed that impersona'on if any order/judgment. 2 person has been commi:ed on the instance of Surjit Singh and she has also the vic'm of the same. From the above said reports, documents and affidavits, it transpires that accused Rajnish Kumar, his wife Manju and the persons who falsely represented themselves to be Rajwant Singh and Daler Singh in connivance with each other hatched a deep rooted conspiracy to cheat this court by producing impersonated/false sure'es and thereby got the accused Rajnish Kumar released from custody in the present criminal and for achieving the above said sinister object, all these persons in connivance with each other prepared false and forged Revenue Record, Aadhar Cards and also furnished false declara'ons in the shape of affidavits to the court. Direc'ons are hereby issued for registra'on of case against Rajnish Kumar, Manju W/o Rajnish Kumar and unknown person as prima facie offence of furnishing false declara'on, chea'ng by impersona'on, making false documents, forgery of valuable security, forgery for the purpose of chea'ng and use of forged documents as genuine are made out. You are directed to send compliance report to the Court and to conduct a thorough inves'ga'on, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Khanna."

¶4The pe!!oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi!ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera!on would cause an irreversible injus!ce to the pe!!oner and his family.

¶5The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶6It would be appropriate to refer to the following por!ons of the status report, which read as follows: "5. (i) Role of the pe''oner:- The role of pe''oner in the conspiracy as such cannot be ruled out at this stage because he was the ul'mate beneficiary. The allega'ons against the pe''oner are grave and serious in nature.

(ii) Evidence against the pe''oner :- There is sufficient evidence against the pe''oner in the case file. Moreover, the pe''oner is person of criminal nature. Apart from the present FIR, an FIR No. 145 dated 04.09.2022 U/S 392/419/324/411/ 395/170/171/201 IPC and 25-27/54/59 Arms Act has been registered against the pe''oner and others at P.S. Sadar Khanna."

¶7Pre-trial incarcera!on should not be a replica of post-convic!on sentencing. The order/judgment. 3 evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu!on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of an!cipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jus!fy custodial interroga!on or pre-trial incarcera!on.

¶8Given the above, the penal provisions invoked 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 for custodial interroga!on or the pre-trial incarcera!on at this stage. 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. This order shall come into force from the !me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶9Given above, provided the pe!!oner is not required in any other case, the pe!!oner shall be released on an!cipatory bail in the FIR cap!oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa!sfac!on of the Arres!ng Officer, and if the maFer is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep!ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa!sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶10While furnishing a personal bond, the pe!!oner shall men!on the following personal iden!fica!on details:

¶1AADHAR number

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

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶11This order is subject to the pe!!oner's complying with the following terms.

¶12The pe''oner is directed to join the inves'ga'on 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 Inves'gator. The pe!!oner shall be in deemed custody for Sec!on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec!on 23 of BSA, 2023. The pe!!oner shall join the inves!ga!on as and when called by the Inves!ga!ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves!ga!on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu!on will be open to seeking cancella!on of the bail. During the inves!ga!on, the pe!!oner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. order/judgment. 4

¶13The pe!!oner shall abide by all statutory bond condi!ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe!!oner 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.

¶14In case the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta!on arraigns another sec!on of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new sec!on prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sec!ons men!oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec!on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec!ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec!ons men!oned above; then, in that case, the Inves!gator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pe!!oner no!ce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶15This 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 be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶16Any observa!on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶17A cer!fied copy of this order would not be needed 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 aFest it to be a true copy. If the aFes!ng officer wants to verify its authen!city, such an officer can also verify its authen!city and may download and use the downloaded copy for aFes!ng bonds.

¶18Pe22on allowed in terms men!oned above. All pending applica!ons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

29.11.2024 Jyo!-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 13.11.2024 Pronounced on: 29.11.2024 Rajnish @ Rajneesh Kumar ...Pe!!oner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. D.P.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the pe!!oner. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab. ****