Punjab-Haryana High Court
Yogesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
CRM-M-50359-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-50359-2024
Reserved on: 04.11.2024
Pronounced on: 12.11.2024
Yogesh Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate and
Mr. L.K.Narang, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
294 28.08.2024 Bilaspur, Yamuna Nagar 318(4) BNS, 2023 (Sections
316(2), 336(3), 338,
340(2)/61(2) BNS and 21 (4) of
Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulation)
Act added subsequently)
1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this
Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking
regular bail.
2. In paragraph 11 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal
antecedents.
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which
reads as follows:
"3. That in this regard, it is submitted that a letter/complaint
No. SR/Mining/Yamunanagar/3037 dated 23.08.2024 moved by
the mining officer Mines and Geology Department, Yamuna
Nagar for legal action regarding misuse of H.M.G.I.S. portal was
received from the office of the Superintendent of Police, Yamuna
Nagar in the police station. Thereupon vide letters no.47781 and
47782 dated 27-08-2024 record was sought from Director
General Mines and Geology Department, Haryana and on the
basis of above said complaint/letter the above mentioned F.I.R.
No. 294, dt. 28-08-2024, U/s 318 (4) of B.N.S was registered at
Police Station Bilaspur, Distt. Yamunanagar. In this regard, the
relevant portion of the contents of F.I.R. have been reproduced as
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-50359-2024
under:-
From Mining officer, Mines and Geology Department, Yamuna
Nagar to the Station House Officer, P.S. Charmant Yamuna
Yamuna Nagar. Memo No/Mining/Yamuna Nagar/3077 dated
23.08.2024. Subject: regarding misuse of HMGIS Portal and
taking legal action in this regard. On the subject cited above, you
are hereby informed that in this office, through a whatsapp
bearing No.9116423647, a complaint was received that MRK
Trading company village Jaitpur District Yamuna Nagar (Project
number 230806001153, Mobile No.8569991815 Email ID-
vishl/vnr/[email protected] (copy attached), have been misusing the
portal and issuing wrong e-rawana (dispatch), notices and the
details are as under: (copies of the e-rawana notices are
attached."
4. 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.
5. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.
6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read
as follows:
"16. That as the aforesaid offence has been committed by the
petitioner and his co-accused in a planned and organized manner
and the petitioner is member of organized crime syndicate and
falls within the definition of section 111 of B.N.S. therefore keeping
in view the facts and circumstances of the case on 13-10-2024
section 111(3) of B.N.S. was added in the present case.
19. That with regard to the role of the petitioner in the
present case it is submitted that as per investigation conducted by
the investigating agency till today it was revealed that the
petitioner is owner of M/s Yamuna Screening Plant Village
Belgarh and having land adjoining to the said screening plant in
the name of his wife namely Geeta. The copy of Patwari Report in
this regard has been Annexed as Annexure R-18. As per due
procedure of law the petitioner has to purchase the mining mineral
through legal process and as per record the petitioner purchased
mining mineral in the month of January-2024 and the last e-
ravanna in this regard was issued on 26 January 2024 but even
thereafter the petitioner continued to run the said screening plant
by doing illegal mining from the land standing in the name of his
wife and also from the banks/land of Yamuna river.
20. That it is pertinent to mention here that during
investigation it was further revealed that the petitioner has
supplied 9586.11 MT of mining material (Gatka) to M/s Bhagat
Singh Stone Crusher in illegal manner without showing the same
on the portal. In this regard, record from M/s Bhagat Singh Stone
Crusher has been taken into the possession which shows the
illegal supply of 1627 trucks of mining minerals by the petitioner
to the M/s Bhagat Singh Stone Crusher. In this regard the record
was verified by the C.A. and the report of the C.A. is annexed as
Annexure R-19.
21. That it is also pertinent to mention here that M/s Bhagat
Singh Stone Crusher has shown the purchase of above said mining
material from R.K. Trading Company, Jaitpur, P.S. Bilaspur, Distt.
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-50359-2024
Yamuna Nagar but the said R.K. Trading Company is a fictitious
firm and the said firm has no existence. Whereas the said mining
material was actually supplied by the petitioner. Thus, the
petitioner is party to the criminal conspiracy and in pursuance of
said criminal conspiracy the petitioner and his co-accused used to
make illegal material to be legal without payment of mining
royalty to the state government and thereby caused loss to the tune
of several crores to the government. The petitioner also supplied
the mining material (Gatka) to the M/s Bhagat Singh Stone
Crusher without payment of any royalty. Thus the petitioner
actively participated in the commission of present offence."
7. It shall be appropriate to mention para 3 of the bail petition, which reads as
follows:
"3. That the present accused petitioner has nothing to do
with any of the above i.e. the consigner, the consignee or the
vehicles which have been allegedly used for transportation of the
mining material. Similarly, the E-way Bills (Rawana Nos.) also do
not belong to the petitioner and have not been generated for his
concern. Infact the petition is having a screening plant which a
partnership firm of the petitioner with one Sh. Amit Kumar which
is named M/s Yamuna Screening Plant at village Bailgarh, Police
Station Partap Nagar, Distt. Yamuna Nagar, which is in operation
for the last about 4 years. It is relevant to mention the mining
activities remain suspended in between the period from
30.06.2024 to 30.09.2024 and thus the petitioner is innocent and
has no connection whatsoever with the allegations as levelled in
the FIR."
8. The explanation offered by the petitioner in the bail petition and as mentioned
above is not primafacie satisfactory. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting
the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a
replica of post-conviction sentencing. Per paragraph 10 of the bail petition, the petitioner
has been in custody since 09.09.2024. Per the custody certificate dated 02.11.2024, the
petitioner's total custody in this FIR is 01 month and 11 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-50359-2024
11. 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)
12. This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms.
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.
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
