Anil vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 259 P&H

CRM-M-60746-2022                                                   -1-

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

212                              CRM-M-60746-2022
                                 Date of Decision: 09.01.2023


Anil                                                        ......... Petitioner

                                    Versus
State of Haryana                                            ......... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL


Present:    Mr.Vikas Bishnoi, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Ms. Priyanka Sadar, AAG, Haryana

                   ****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner, through instant petition under Section 439

Cr.P.C., is seeking regular bail in FIR No. 223 dated 24.04.2021 under

Sections 363, 366A, 344, 376 (2) (n) IPC (Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012

has been added and Section 346 IPC has been deleted later on) registered

at Police Station HTM Hisar, District Hisar.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the

victim had died due to multiple ailments which fact is not disputed by

anyone. The victim had run away with the petitioner at her own free will

and at the time of death, she was staying with the petitioner. The petitioner

provided all the medical facilities to the victim which is evident from the

fact that when complainant came to house of the petitioner, the victim was

on oxygen. The family of the petitioner had informed the mother of the

victim about the medical condition of the victim. The petitioner is not

involved in any other offence. The petitioner is permanent resident of

1 of 4

District Hisar and staying with family members. The petitioner has deep

roots in the society. There is no possibility of flee from justice.

3. Learned State Counsel submits that it is undisputed fact that

the victim was suffering from multiple ailments and she had died because

of organs failure. She further submits that challan has already been

presented and charges stand framed but no prosecution witness has been

examined. The petitioner is involved in the commission of grave offence,

thus, no leniency is warranted and release of petitioner would hamper the

trial.

5. A two judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender

Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51, with respect to prevailing

conditions of undertrial prisoner in India has observed:

"6. Jails in India are flooded with undertrial prisoners. The statistics placed before us would indicate that more than 2/3rd of the inmates of the prisons constitute undertrial prisoners. Of this category of prisoners, majority may not even be required to be arrested despite registration of a cognizable offence, being charged with offences punishable for seven years or less. They are not only poor and illiterate but also would include women. Thus, there is a culture of offence being inherited by many of them. As observed by this Court, it certainly exhibits the mindset, a vestige of colonial India, on the part of the investigating agency, notwithstanding the fact arrest is a draconian measure resulting in curtailment of liberty, and thus to be used sparingly. In a democracy, there can never be an impression that it is a police State as both are conceptually opposite to each other."

6. Intent of arrest and reason of denial of bail is to:

i) Secure the appearance of the accused at the time of

trial;

2 of 4

ii) Allay possibility of repeating of offence &

jeopardising own life on account of grim prospect of

being convicted;

iii) Avoid possibility of tampering of evidence and

security of witnesses who may be pressurised or

maltreated.

7. A person who seeks to be liberated must take judgment and

serve sentence in the event of his conviction. The nature of the crime

charged, severity of punishment prescribed, prime facie available

evidences, history & background of the accused may indicate that any

amount of bond and surety is not going to secure presence of accused, at

the time of conviction. Detention or arrest not only deprives a person from

his fundamental right of personal liberty guaranteed by article 21 but also

freedom guaranteed by article 19(1) of our Constitution.

8. Keeping in mind:

i) The Petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2021;

ii) Police report under section 173 of Cr.P.C. stands filed,

charges stand framed;

iii) There are 21 prosecution witnesses but till date, no witness

has been examined, thus, there is abysmally low possibility

of conclusion of trial in near future;

iv) It is family of the petitioner who informed the complainant

about the medical condition of the victim ;

v) The victim was on oxygen at the time of vist of her mother;

vi) The victim had died on account of multiple organs failure

and there is no direct evidence of rape committed by the

3 of 4

petitioner;

vii) The victim was alive at the time when the complainant met

her, however, there is no statement of victim disclosing the

commission of alleged offence by the petitioner;

viii) Twin stringent conditions of bail prescribed under special

statutes like PMLA, UAPA, NDPS Act, Companies Act are

not applicable in the case in hand;

ix) The Petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case;

x) The Petitioner is permanent resident of District Hisar and

staying with family members;

xi) Prosecution has not led any convincing/plausible

documentary or oral evidence indicating possibility of

Petitioner being flee from justice or tempering the evidences

or winning over/threatening the witnesses;

this Court is of the considered opinion that present petition

deserves to allowed and accordingly allowed. The petitioner is ordered to

be released on bail subject to conditions as may be imposed by trial

Court/illaqa/Duty Magistrate concerned.

                                                 ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL )
                                                       JUDGE
09.01.2023
anju

              Whether speaking/reasoned            Yes/No
                    Whether Reportable             Yes/No




                                        4 of 4