Punjab-Haryana High Court
Neeraj vs State Of Haryana on 28 October, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
CRM-M-48368-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-48368-2024
Reserved on: 16.10.2024
Pronounced on: 28.10.2024
Neeraj ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Abhishek Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishal Kashyap, DAG, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
95 15.04.2024 BPTP, Faridabad 436/506/34 IPC
1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this
Court under Section 439 CrPC, 1973, seeking regular bail.
2. In paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal
antecedents.
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the status report filed by the State,
which reads as follows:
"2. That brief facts of the case are that on 15.04.2024, at
about 9:00, three persons in an auto-rickshaw, came from the
wrong side to get filled CNG. They were asked politely to come in
queue but the passengers of the auto-rickshaw, started
misbehaving with the Salesman, at the Petrol Pump and after
getting filled the CNG in their vehicle, hit Devi Singh, an
employee at the Pump, while extending threat to kill and also to
set ablaze the pump. After sometime, all the three boys in their
auto-rickshaw again came to the Pump. One of the boys got down
from the auto-rickshaw and unlatched the nozzle of the Petrol
Machine, placated on the ground and set it on fire. One of the
boys exclaimed to set ablaze the Petrol Pump and all three of them
fled from the spot, while threatening that today the Pump was
saved, but they would not leave them in future. On these
allegations, the present FIR No. 95 dated 15.04.2024, under
Sections 436, 506, 34 IPC, was registered at Police Station BPTP,
District Faridabad."
4. The petitioner's counsel makes the following submissions:
Jyoti Sharma "1. That an FIR No. 95 dated 15.04.2024 U/ss 436, 506, 34
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-48368-2024
IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station BPTP, Faridabad, District
Faridabad, True version was alleged that on 15.04.2024 at about
9:00 AM, three persons in an auto-rickshaw, came from the wrong
side, to get filled CNG. They were asked politely, to come in a
queue but the passengers of the auto-rickshaw. started
misbehaving with the Salesman, at the Petrol Pump and after
getting filled the CNG in their vehicle, hit Devi Singh, an
employee at the Pump, while extending threat to kill and to set
ablaze the pump. After some time. all the three boys in their auto-
rickshaw again came to the Pump. One of the boys got down from
the auto-rickshaw and unlatched the nozzle of the Petrol Machine,
placated on the ground, and set it on fire. One of the boys
exclaimed to set ablaze the Petrol Pump and all three of them fled
from the spot, while threatening that today the Pump was saved,
but they would not leave them in future. The true Copy of the FIR
is annexed as Annexure P- 1.
2. That no test identification Parade has been conducted by
the police and the accused are not even identified by any of the
employees of the petrol pump.
3. That it is also pertinent to mention here that on
15.04.2024 the petitioner was arrested, and personal search of the
petitioners was conducted, and nothing was recovered from.
4. That the petitioner is in custody since 15.04.2024 in the
present case and they are no more required for the custodial
interrogation as the investigation has been already completed and
challan has already been presented on 22.07.2024.
5. That the petitioner has not been involved previously in
any other case. Even, in the present case the name of the
petitioner has been falsely implicated.
6. That the petitioners approached the court of Ld. Session
Judge, Faridabad for the grant of regular bail for the third time,
but the same has been rejected vide order dated 04.09.2024
without considering that the main accused and co-accused were
already granted the concession of regular bail. The copy of the
order dated 04.09.2024 is attached herewith as Annexure P-5."
5. 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.
6. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.
7. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the status report,
which read as follows:
"4. That on 15.04.2024, petitioner Neeraj and co-accused Ajit &
Manish were arrested in the present case. They suffered their
disclosure statements and confessed their guilt. In pursuance to
their disclosure statements, they also got demarcated the 52 place
of occurrence. Petitioner/accused got recovered his auto rickshaw
bearing registration No. HR-38AF-8639, used in the commission
of offence, which was taken into possession. Translated version of
disclosure statement of petitioner/accused alongwith vernacular
thereof is being annexed herewith as Annexure R-1.
6. That during investigation, the complainant Mukesh
Kumar joined the investigation and stated that the fire in the petrol
nozzle of the number 10 machine of the petrol pump, was
extinguished by the guard Bhule Ram with his shoes. Said incident
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-48368-2024
was recorded in the CCTV cameras installed at the petrol pump.
The CCTV footage from those cameras was produced by putting it
in 3 pen drives, one pair of shoes, 3 pen drives were taken into
possession.
7. That thereafter, CCTV footage of the occurrence was
perused, wherein it is clearly being seen that three persons in an
auto- rickshaw are being seen coming from the wrong side for
getting filled CNG and the passengers of the auto-rickshaw are
being seen misbehaving with the Salesman at the Petrol Pump.
After getting filled the CNG in their vehicle, they are also being
seen hitting an employee at the Pump. After sometime, all the
three boys in their auto-rickshaw are again being seen coming to
the Pump. One of the boys is seen getting down from the auto-
rickshaw, who unlatched the nozzle of the Petrol Machine,
placated on the ground and set it on fire. Thereafter, all three of
them are being seen fleeing from the spot. Some relevant
photographs taken from CCTV footage are being annexed
herewith as Annexure R-2 collectively for kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court."
8. The petitioner drove the Auto to attack the petrol pump, and from the Auto, the
co-accused Neeraj set it on fire, but a daring guard extinguished the fire. Had the fire not
been extinguished, it could have led to unimaginable loss of lives and property. The
offense is heinous and cruel, and the petitioner is not entitled to bail on merit.
9. The petitioner is not entitled to bail on parity with co-accused Ajeet because he
was neither the driver of the Auto Rikshaw nor did he put a matchstick to set the petrol
pump on fire.
10. The petitioner's custody is six months, which cannot be stated to be prolonged at
this stage, and at this stage, is not entitled to bail even on custody.
11. A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached primafacie points
towards the petitioner's involvement and does not make out a case for bail. The impact of
crime would not justify bail. Any further discussions will likely prejudice the petitioner;
this court refrains from doing so.
12. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the
case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
13. Petition dismissed. Interim orders, if any, are recalled with immediate effect. All
pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
28.10.2024 JUDGE
Jyoti Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
authenticity of this order/judgment
