The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to an accused in a cheating case, holding that the pendency of other criminal cases against the petitioner cannot be the sole ground to deny bail if the facts of the case justify release.
Justice N.S. Shekhawat was hearing a petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking bail in connection with FIR No. 0726 dated 22.11.2023, registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sector-10, Gurugram.
Background
The petitioner, Raj Kumar, was arrested on July 9, 2024. A charge-sheet was filed on August 12, 2024. Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Mr. Sparsh Chhiber submitted that the matter arose from a civil dispute which was given a criminal colour. He pointed out that the petitioner had been in custody for over 10 months and the complainant had already been examined during trial.
State’s Opposition
Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Haryana, assisted by Mr. Ravi Yadav, counsel for the complainant, opposed the bail plea on the ground that the petitioner was involved in five other criminal cases and was a habitual offender. However, they did not dispute the fact that the complainant had already been examined and the offences in question were triable by a Magistrate.
Court’s Analysis
Justice Shekhawat observed that while the petitioner was indeed involved in other cases, that fact alone could not be a reason to deny bail if the circumstances of the present case warranted relief.
Citing the Supreme Court’s rulings in Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. & Anr., 2020(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 831, and Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. & Anr., 2012(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 586, the Court reiterated that multiple pending cases do not, by themselves, disentitle an accused from bail.
The Court noted that the petitioner had been in custody for more than 10 months, the trial was not likely to conclude soon, and further incarceration would serve no useful purpose.
Order and Conditions
Granting bail, the Court directed that the petitioner be released upon furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court or Magistrate, subject to stringent conditions including:
- Not threatening or influencing witnesses;
- Regular appearance before the Court;
- Surrendering or declaring status of passport;
- Disclosing and updating residence and mobile contact details;
- Avoiding any further criminal activity during the pendency of the trial.
The Court further warned that any violation of these conditions would lead to cancellation of bail.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Raj Kumar vs State of Haryana
- Case No.: CRM-M-57570-2024
- Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:069855
- Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Sparsh Chhiber
- Counsel for State: Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana
- Counsel for Complainant: Mr. Ravi Yadav
