SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 2012

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
KULDEEP TIWARI, J.
Surbhi - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M-14070-2024 (O&M)
Decided On : 07-05-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajat Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Addl. A.G, Haryana

JUDGMENT :

Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

Through the instant petition, the petitioner craves for indulgence of this Court for her being enlarged on regular bail, in case FIR No.463 dated 10.10.2023, under Sections 328 and 380 of IPC (under Sections 420, 120-B and 201 of IPC, added later on), registered at Police Station DLF, District Gurugram.

ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PETITIONER

2. The prosecution agency was set into motion on a complaint made by one Rohit Gupta, alleging therein, that he was using a dating App named Bumble, and on the said App on 01.10.2023, he met a girl, who introduced herself as Sakshi/Payal, but, whereas, actually her name was Surbhi (present petitioner). On that day i.e. 01.10.2023, at around 10:00 pm, on asking of the present petitioner, the complainant picked up the petitioner from the Dockyard Bar, Sector 47,Gurugram, and bought some liquor from a liquor shop, and then came back to complainants house. During the short stay of the present petitioner at complainants house, at night, the present petitioner mixed some intoxicating substance in his drink, due to which the complainant became unconscious, and thereafter, when he woke up, he found that his 20 grams of gold chain, worth Rs.90,000/-, I-phone 14 Pro phone, worth Rs.1.5 lacs, Rs.10,000/- cash, HDFC bank debit card, Axis Bank credit card, and a City bank credit card were missing from his house.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

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

(i) There is no evidence on record which could attract the present petitioner with the alleged crime;

(ii) Petitioner has suffered incarceration of more than 06 months, as on today;

(iii) The recovery as alleged in the complaint has already been effected from the present petitioner;

(iv) The final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., had already been filed on 11.12.2023, but the charges are yet to be framed

(v). The petitioner is stated to be involved in two more criminal cases, out of which, in one case, she is on bail.

(vi) Out of the total 11 prosecution witnesses cited in the final report, none has been examined so far.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED STATE COUNSEL

4. Per contra, the learned State counsel, who is in receipt of advance notice, has placed on record the custody certificate of the petitioner, as issued by the Deputy Superintendent, District Prison (Gurugram), Haryana. The same is taken on record. A perusal of the custody certificate reveals that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 06 months and 15 days, as on today. A perusal of the custody certificate further reveals that the petitioner is stated to be involved in two more criminal cases, out of which, in one case, she is on bail. Learned State counsel on instructions, imparted to him from the official respondent, submits that after conclusion of the investigation, the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., had already been filed on 11.12.2023, but the charges are yet to be framed. Learned State counsel further submits that out of the total 11 prosecution witnesses cited in the final report, none has been examined so far.

ANALYSIS

5. Before embarking upon the process of evaluating the arguments addressed by the learned counsels for the parties and penning down any opinion upon the instant petition, it is deemed imperative to capture an overview of some significant legal propositions.

6. "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception". This basic principle of criminal jurisprudence was laid down by the Hon'ble 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,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top