Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 3009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S. SHEKHAWAT, J.
Vijay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
CRA-S-174 of 2022
Decided On : 28-08-2023
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE: S.439(2)
INDIAN PENAL CODE: S.285, S.307, S.341, S.427, S.506, S.34
SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES AMENDMENT ACT: S.14(a), S.3(2)(v)(a)
Headnote
(B) Bail - Principles - Factors for bail consideration include gravity of the crime, prosecution evidence, and potential for interfering with the trial - Cancellation of bail requires showing of serious irregularity resulting in miscarriage of justice - Reaffirmed that bail cancellation is a harsh measure. (Paras 6-8)
Facts of the case:
The appellant alleged threats and firing by respondents during an altercation stemming from an incident involving the appellant's daughter; bail had been granted for over a year without misuse.
Findings of Court:
Trial Court's bail orders were sound, ensuring compliance with procedural requirements and considering arguments before grant of bail.
Issues: Whether the Trial Court ignored the mandatory provisions of the Act, and whether bail was granted despite prima facie involvement of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant was duly represented, and all evidence was considered. No serious flaws found in the decisions granting bail.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advocate; For the Appellantin both the appeals.
For the Respondents:Ms. Sheenu Sura, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
Mr. V.K Sheoran, Advocate for Respondent No.2 in both the appeals.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the appeals. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail cancellation. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations and assessment of the trial. (Para 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. principles governing bail and its cancellation. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. final dismissal of the appeals. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT
N.S.Shekhawat, J.
This order shall dispose of two criminal appeals i.e CRA-S-174-2022 titled as Vijay Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another and CRA-S-175-2022 titled as Vijay Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another, which have been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), read with Section 439(2) Cr.P.C for setting aside the orders passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Charkhi Dadri, whereby the regular bail has been allowed to respondents No.2/accused in both the appeals in a case arising out of FIR No.264 dated 18.10.2020 under Sections 285 , 307, 341, 427 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, under Section 25 of the ARMS ACT and under Section 3 (2) (va) of SC and ST Act, Police Station Badhra.
2. A prayer has been made in both the appeals to cancel the bail granted to respondents No.2 in both the cases and to direct them to surrender.
3. The FIR in the present case was got registered by the petitioner/complainant namely Vijay Kumar by alleging that on 12.10.2020, his daughter Pooja had eloped from Bawana (Delhi) and during the enquiry made by him later on, he came to know that Ankit @Dholiya (respondent No.2 in CRA-S-175-2022) had taken her away with him. The matter was reported to the police at Police Station Bawana(Delhi). On the date of incident, i.e on 18.10.2020, at about 01:15 P.M, the complainant along with his cousin Sandeep were going in their car from their village to Loharu and when they reached near Government School, Village Dharni two boys namely Ankit @ Dholiya and Robin, both respondents No.2/accused in the abovesaid appeals came from the front side in a white colour camper vehicle and stopped their vehicle in front of the car of the complainant. They started abusing and threatened to kill the complainant. When the complainant tried to run away from the spot, Ankit @ Dholiya blocked the passage with the vehicle and also fired from his pistol in the air. After this, pistol was taken by Robin and he also fired on their vehicle with an intention to kill them and the bullet hit the front glass of the car, right side neck of Sandeep and then hit in the seat of the car. The complainant ran away from the spot and Sandeep, injured was shifted to the hospital for treatment. Both the accused were arrested in the present case on 18.10.2020 and were ordered to be released on regular bail vide the impugned orders, which have been challenged in abovementioned appeals.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant, while referring to Section 15-A of the "Act" stated that a victim under the Act has a right to reasonable, accurate and timely notice of any Court proceedings including any bail proceedings and the victim is entitled to be heard at any proceeding under this "Act" in respect of the bail. Further, all proceedings relating to the offences have to be videographed in the present case and the victims have to be protected in all respects. Apart from that, the copy of the charge-sheet should be provided free of cost to the victim and it shall be right of the victim to seek assistance from NGO, social workers or advocates. He further contends that in the present case, in absence of copy of charge-sheet and supplementary charge-sheet, it was not possible for the appellant/complainant to lead/file his written submissions as provided under Sub-Section 5 of Section 15-A of the "Act". Still further, the Lower Court had not even issued notice to the appellant/complainant and the counsel was not allowed to file a written submission in the present case. Apart from that, the gravity and the role attributed to the petitione
