Anticipatory bail granted due to insufficient evidence for custodial interrogation, emphasizing the protection of minors and the principle against unjust pre-trial detention.

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , [ BNSS ], seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 31 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. However, as per paragraph 14 of the status report, the accused has the following criminal antecedents:

3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows:

“2. That, the brief facts of the case are that on 28.12.2020, ASI Vinod Kumar along with Ct. Sunil and SPO Satish was present in Civil Hospital, Jind when MHC gave an information regarding a robbery being committed by 4-5 boys in Central Bank of India, Village Barsola. On receipt of this information, they reached there. Statement of Bank Manager Abhijit son of Shri Surja Ram, resident of H.No.2037 Sector 16/17, Hisar was recorded wherein he stated that today i.e. on 28.12.2020, at about 12.05 PM, he was working on his computer. Head Cashier Kapil Dev was on the cash counter. At that time, four boys, out of which two were armed with weapons entered the bank and one boy stood guard at the gate. All the boys started abusing them. Two of them fired. They took Rs.45,600/- cash and the bag of Head Cashier containing one mobile with Sim No.98967xxxx, ID Card, key of shutter of the bank, Cheque book, RC of motorcycle No.HR-31P-5324 and Driving Licence. Thereafter, all the five accused ran away on two motorcycles. Further requested for taking legal action against the accused persons was made. On the basis of above statement, present case bearing FIR No.479 dated 28.12.2020, under Sections 395 of IPC and 25 Arms Act was registered at Police Station Sadar Jind, District Jind (Annexure P-1).”

4. The petitioner’s counsel submits that on the date of alleged incident i.e. on 28.12.2020, the petitioner was about 17½ years and was minor. The petitioner is a student and doing BBA and as per the university schedule his exam was going on. He submits that after a gap of more than four years, he has been falsely involved in the case. He further submits that the weapon used in the crime has already been recovered from the co-accused Deepak @ Kuku in another FIR i.e. FIR No.146 dated 25.02.2022. He further submits that the complainant and other star witnesses have been examined but they did not identified the co-accused. The name of the petitioner has been surfaced in the supplementary statement of the co-accused and at the time of disclosure statement, no independent witness has been joined by the prosecution.

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 his 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:

“15. That the complicity of the petitioner is concerned, it is submitted that the petitioner-accused was actively involved in the commission of offence. The present FIR has been registered for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 395/397/120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act on the allegations that five boys committed dacoity in the Central Bank after arming themselves with deadly weapons. During the course of investigation of the case from the disclosure statements of the co-accused (Annexure R-1 to R-3), it has been surfaced that the petitioner-accused after committing the loot in bank has taken away the amount of loot Rs.45,000/- and two country made pistols with him and thereafter,