Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurjeet Singh @ Punjabi vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
CRM-M-51632-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-51632-2024
Reserved on: 07.11.2024
Pronounced on: 12.11.2024
Gurjeet Singh @ Punjabi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Arvinder Arora, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
207 21.07.2020 Naraingarh, 307/323/324/506/34 IPC
District Ambala
1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this
Court under Section 439, 1973, seeking regular bail.
2. Per paragraph 18 of the bail application and the reply/custody certificate, the
accused has the following criminal antecedents:
Sr. FIR Dated Offences Police Station
No. No.
1 35 14.02.2018 148/149/307/323/324/427/452/506 Naraingarh,
/120-B IPC and 25 of Arms Act District Ambala
2 137 23.04.2017 323/506/34 IPC Naraingarh,
District Ambala
3 146 27.05.2020 148/149/323/427/506 IPC Naraingarh,
District Ambala
4 100 22.03.2019 148/149/323/324/326/506/120-B Naraingarh,
IPC District Ambala
5 463 16.09.2020 21 of NDPS Act Mahesh Nagar,
District Ambala
3. 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.
4. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.
5. The petitioner was earlier on bail; however, he failed to appear, which led to the
Jyoti Sharma cancellation of the bail vide order dated 17-08-2021 by the trial Court.
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-51632-2024
6. The petitioner was earlier granted bail, and as such, this court is inclined to grant
bail subject to the strict condition that the petitioner shall not remain absent from the trial
even on a single day and subject to compliance with the following conditions.
7. As per paragraph 6 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since
17.05.2024. Per the custody certificate dated 30.10.2024, the petitioner's total custody in
this FIR is 07 months and 20 days. 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 further pre-trial incarceration
at this stage.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the
following personal identification details:
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)
11. This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms.
12. The petitioner shall attend the trial without a single absence.
13. 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.
14. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the
case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-51632-2024
15. 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.
16. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
12.11.2024
Jyoti Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
authenticity of this order/judgment
