Pardeep Kumar Alias Kala v. State of Haryana

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta2on Sec2ons 139 27.07.2024 Panjokhara, 118(1), 351(2), 61 of BNS (Secton 61 of District Ambala BNS deleted and Secton 118(2) of BNS added later on)

¶1The pettoner incarcerated in the FIR captoned above came before this Court under Secton 483 of Bharatya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.

¶2As per paragraph 10 of the status report, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offenses Police Sta2on

¶154 24.05.2021 160, 186 IPC Panjokhra

¶257 26.05.2021 148, 149, 323, 325, 506 IPC Panjokhra

¶367 24.03.2022 406, 420 IPC Panjokhra

¶4104 06.05.2022 148, 149, 325, 506 IPC & Panjokhra 25/54/59 of Arms Act

¶5103 19.06.2024 323, 506, 34 IPC Panjokhra

¶3The facts and allegatons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows: "3. That as a mater of fact, on 27.07.2024, a telephonic informaton has been received in the Police Post Patvi, PS Panjokhra from the CHC, Shahzadpur that injured Satsh Kumar son of Siya Ram r/o village Tasdauli, PS Panjokhra, Ambala is admited in the CHC Shahzadpur and he order/judgment. 1 has been referred to Civil Hospital, Ambala City for further treatment, pleased send IO for investgaton. Upon which, the IO reached at Civil Hospital, Ambala City and moved an applicaton before the Medical Officer for giving permission for recording the statement of injured Satsh Kumar and a2er due permission, IO recorded the statement of injured Satsh Kumar. The contents of the statement is as under: "Statement of Satsh Kumar S/o Siya Ram resident of village Tasdauli, Police Staton Panjokhra District Ambala, Age 55 years, Mobile No. 94163-xxxx. Stated that I am a resident of the above mentoned name and address. I am an agriculturalist and I have bought land from Gurbaksh Singh S/o Haryam Singh resident of Tasdauli which is in the name of my daughter-in-law and we have been in possession of it for about 3 years but Gurbaksh Singh's nephew Pradeep Kumar, his mother Kulwinder Kaur and Pradeep's father Gurnam Singh are angry with me for taking this land and prevent me from entering the land. Regarding this, a few days ago Pradeep, his mother Kulwinder Kaur and father Gurnam Singh have also beaten my wife Sushma, in connecton with which my wife Sushma has also filed a case against Pradeep and Kulwinder Kaur. About 4/5 days ago when I was going to the fields in the village, Pradeep, Kulwinder Kaur, Gurnam Singh and Pradeep's wife Kulwinder Kaur threatened me that they would make me pay for filing a case against me and buying our land. Today at about 10:15 AM, I was going from Janak Raj's fields towards the land that I had purchased, when I reached near Gauhar Musri's field, Pradeep came from the front on his tractor (New Holland 3630) and challenged me saying that today you are trapped alone, today I will make you pay for buying this land and filing a case against me, and he followed his tractor behind me and kept a tractor about one Kila behind me and kept abusing me and I got tred and sit near the tubewell and when I sit, Pradeep atacked me with an axe on my right arm, le2 hand, head and le2 leg. When I shouted for help, my neighbour Rajesh Kumar, Jaitnder S/o Ram Kumar, my brother Karambir and my son Vijay Kumar came to the spot. A2er that my family members took me to the hospital. That Pradeep Kumar, his mother Kulwinder Kaur, Pradeep's wife Kulwinder Kaur and his father Gurnam Singh had atacked me as per a plan. Pradeep Kumar was threatening me while leaving that today, I have been saved but in future I will kill you and your family. Pradeep threatened Rajesh Kumar and Janak Raj that if anyone supports him then he will do the same to them as he did to Satsh. JYOTI You have writen my statement in Civil Hospital Ambala City, read it heard order/judgment. 2 which is correct. Sd/-LTI Satsh Kumar." IO also collected MLR (MLR No. SZP/27/07/2024/SD dated 24.07.2024) of the injured and on examinaton of the same, it is learnt that the doctor has mentoned a total 05 injuries on his person, out of which injury No. 1 & 5 were sharp weapon, and injury No. 2. 3 & 4 were blunt. Hence the present Case u/s 118(1), 351(2), 61 PS Panjokhra, Ambala. of B.N.S., 2023 has been registered at PS Panjokhra, Ambala."

¶4Counsel for the pettoner has argued that the pettoner is a permanent resident of Ambala and he is sole bread earner. He has old parents, wife and a minor son aged 04 years. He further argued that complainant has given criminal colour to the civil proceedings and no suit for permanent injuncton etc. was ever filed. He further argued that the complainant intentonally concealed the area of alleged land.

¶5The 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.

¶6The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶7It would be appropriate to refer to the following portons of the status report, which read as follows: "9. That it is submited that on 02.09.2024, IO moved an applicaton alongwith CT Scan report of the injured Satsh Kumar before the Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Ambala City for obtaining opinion of the doctor and a2er seeing all the medical history of the injured the doctor has opined that "x-ray advised. According to MLR prepared by me, I have mentoned 5 injuries. Injury no. 1-Grievous in nature, no.2-Simple, no.3 -Simple, no.4-Report pending, no.5-Simple. As per injury and x-ray report fracture nasal bones B/L present, injury is grievous in nature, not dangerous to life. As per file record Patent has comminuted fractured both bone forearm Right distal part with subluxaton, old fracture le2 fibula and pot's fracture right ankle. As per ortho opinion comminuted fractured both bone forearm right distal part, subluxaton and pot's fracture right ankle.

¶9That as far as concerned the role of the accused-pettoner in the commission of present crime of the case is that the accused-pettoner has taken an actve part in causing injuries upon the person of the complainant/injured Satsh Kumar with axe duly recovered on his demarcaton and also tried to run over the tractor over the order/judgment. 3 complainant/injured, and the same was got recovered on his demarcaton and in this way, the accused-pettoner suffered injuries on the person of injured/complainant and has commited a grave offence, which effect the society and general public at large. It is also pertnent to menton here that on perusal of medical examinaton report of victm reveals that victm has received fracture injury on his nasal bone alongwith other parts of body and allegatons under secton 118(2) of BNS, 2023 is punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment of not less than one year but which may extend to 10 years and fine and is non bailable, however, the allegaton under secton 118(1) of BNS is punishable with imprisonment for three years or fine of Rs.20,000/- or both and is non bailable. Moreover, the fact that a2er being admited to bail on previous occasion in the other cases registered against the accused-pettoner, the accused-pettoner has not been desisted from his criminal actvity and has inflicted grievous injury upon victm/complainant, hence not enttled for regular bail and in case he may be released on bail, he may threat to the witnesses and may tamper with the prosecuton evidence or may flee from the legal punishment."

¶8Although, the pettoner has criminal antecedents but considering the nature of allegatons in the previous cases, this Court does not find any justfiable reason to contnue the pre-trial custody and pettoner's custody in the present FIR is slightly less than 06 months and the specific conditons can be imposed to ensure that the pettoner does not repeat the offence.

¶9There is sufficient primafacie evidence connectng the pettoner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceraton should not be a replica of post-convicton sentencing.

¶10As per paragraph 2 of the bail petton, the pettoner has been in custody since

03.08.2024. As per the custody certficate dated 08.01.2025, the pettoner's total custody in this FIR is five months and seven days.

¶11Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegatons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justfiability further pre-trial incarceraton at this stage.

¶12Without 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. This order shall come into force from the tme it is uploaded on this Court's order/judgment. 4 official webpage.

¶13Given 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 concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before acceptng the surety, the concerned Court must be satsfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶14While furnishing a personal bond, the pettoner shall menton the following personal identficaton details:

¶1AADHAR number

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

¶3Mobile number (If available)

¶4E-Mail id (If available)

¶15This order is subject to the pettoner's complying with the following terms.

¶16The 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.

¶17Given 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 aIempt 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 BhaI v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

¶18Given the background of allegatons against the pettoner, it becomes paramount to protect the victm, and their family members, as well as 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 acquiIal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restricton is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediateJYOTI order/judgment. 5 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 fiNeen days from release from prison and inform the Investgator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pettoner shall be enttled to renew and take it back in case of acquiIal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in 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.

¶19The 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."

¶20This bail is condi#onal, and the founda#onal condi#on is that if the pe##oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an applica#on for cancella#on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail.

¶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 aIest it to be a true copy. If the aIestng officer wants to verify its authentcity, such an officer can also verify its authentcity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aIestng bonds.

¶23Pe22on allowed in terms mentoned above. All pending applicatons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA)

28.01.2025 JUDGE Jyot-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 09.01.2025 Pronounced on: 28.01.2025 Pardeep Kumar @ Kala ...Pettoner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Nirmal Singh, Advocate, for the pettoner. Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana. ****