Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate with Mr. Arishdeep Mraad, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

JUDGMENT :

Kuldeep Tiwari, J. (Oral)

The petitioner, who is a foreign national (Iranian citizen), has accessed this Court through the instant petition, thereby seeking the concession of him being enlarged on regular bail, in case FIR No.614 dated 23.10.2022, under Sections 379, 34, 419 and 420 of the IPC (Section 304-II of the IPC added subsequently), registered at P.S.Gurgaon Sadar, District Gurugram. 

ALLEGATION(S) AGAINST THE PETITIONER

2. Succinctly stated, what constituted the bedrock for registration of the present FIR, was the complaint made by one Nada Ali Salman, on the allegations that, two persons, one of whom impersonated himself as a police official, met her and her husband at the gate of their hotel, and, told them that they are required to be searched, owing to there being suspicion of them carrying some drugs. During search, the said persons took the purse of the complainants husband, which contained $ 15,000 US Dollar, on the pretext that it emits smell of contraband, and thereupon, they fled away with the said purpose.

3. The petitioner, who was arrested in FIR No.69 dated 05.03.2023, under Section 419, 420/34 of the IPC, made a disclosure statement qua his involvement in the present FIR. Consequently, based upon his disclosure, he got recovered $ 5,000 US Dollars in FIR No.69 (supra).

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in his asking for the hereinabove extracted relief, has made the following submissions:-

(i) Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he has not been named in the FIR, rather he has been implicated on the basis of his disclosure statement, as allegedly suffered in another FIR;

(ii) Nonetheless, even if the allegations are taken to be a gospel truth, yet no offence under Section 304-II of the IPC is made out, inasmuch as, neither any knowledge, nor any intention has been attributed to the petitioner;

(iii) Petitioner has undergone incarceration of approx. 1iy2 months;

(iv) Investigation stands completed, whereupon, Final Report has been presented on 09.06.2023;

(v) Since charges are yet to be framed, therefore, the trial is not likely to conclude anytime soon and keeping the petitioner behinds the bars would serve no gainful purpose;

(vi) Though the petitioner is involved in four other criminal cases, however, he is on bail in all those cases.

(vii) Petitioner does not have any intention to flee from the clutches of law, as his passport and other travel documents have been seized by the police officials;

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED STATE COUNSEL

5. Per contra, the learned State counsel has vociferously opposed the grant of regular bail to the petitioner, on the ground that, despite him himself being a foreign national (Iranian citizen), yet he, with an evil design, snatched money from another foreign national, who had visited India for surgery of her husband. Owing to this snatching incident, the complainant could not get her husband operated, which ultimately resulted in his demise. Therefore, when the petitioner has brought disrepute to India, an emerging medical hub, he does not deserve the concession of regular bail.

6. The learned State counsel has, on instructions imparted to him by A.S.I. Tarun, has not disputed that the petitioner has been behind the bars since 11.04.2023, and that, charges are yet to be framed.

ANALYSIS

7. "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception". This basic principle of criminal jurisprudence was laid down by the Honble Supreme Court, way back in 1978, in its landmark judgment titled "State of Rajasthan V. Balchand alias Baliay", 1977 AIR 2447, 1978 SCR (1) 535. This principle finds its roots in one of the most distinguished fundamental rights, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Though the underlying objective behind detention of a person is to ensure easy availability of an accused for trial, without any inconvenience, however, in case the presence of an accused can be secured otherw