Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 Date of decision: 3.12.2010 Deepak Balhara ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .... Respondent Present: Mr. Baljender Dhankhar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.C.Gupta, Sr. DAG, Haryana **** S.S. SARON, J. Heard the counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him for the offences under sections 394, 395, 454, 506 IPC besides Section 25 of the Arms Act. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint of Raman Khanna son of Shyam Sunder Khanna. It is alleged by the complainant that he is the Secretary of Adarsh School and Alps Education Society (`Society' – for short). His father Shyam Sunder Khanna is the President of the said Society. The complainant is the Manager and Caretaker of the Society. There were some differences amongst the members of the said Society. The former members Om Parkash Nandwani and Bishnu Bhagwan Gupta had initiated litigation in the High Court and several cases were also pending in the Courts at Rohtak and Delhi. On the date of the incident i.e. 2.1.2009 at 7.15 a.m., the complainant was sleeping in his room along with his mother – Smt. Chanchal Devi. In the meantime, a young man entered in their room and kept a pistol on his head. The complainant asked as to who was he and what was the matter. Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -2- Upon hearing the complainant’s voice, his mother who was sleeping on the bed also woke up and started saying as to who was he and what was the matter. In the meantime, two more young men entered the room and one of them hit the mother of the complainant on the back of her head with the butt of a pistol which he was holding. They picked up the complainant and tied his hands and feet and made him sit behind the bed of his mother. The complainant then said that he had to ease himself and they should let him go. The boy who had caught the complainant took him with him to the bath room attached to the same room. Meanwhile, the complainant heard the voice of his mother asking the other two boys as to what did they want and they should leave her son (complainant). In the meantime, the boy who had caught hold of the complainant inflicted 2-3 blows on the left side of his head with the pistol he was holding in his hand.The blows hit above and under his left eye and they got him out of the bath room. The mother of the complainant, on the asking of the intruders, gave cash and jewellery to them from the almirah and she asked the boy who was holding the complainant to leave him. They also threatened the complainant. The complainant said that the cash and jewellery had been given to them and now what was the problem. On that the other boy said as to how can they leave him and they want more money. The complainant said that he did not have enough money. On that the boy who was holding the complainant said that he was fond of moving in an Accent car. Earlier he used to live in the housing board; besides, they said that they had taken a contract for `3,00,000/- to kill him and if he was to survive, he should give them `5,00,000/-. The complainant asked as to who gave the contract and the boy who was holding him slapped him and said that the name was not disclosed like this. Then the boy who was standing with them, said that they have been hired by Om Parkash Nandwani and Bishnu Bhagwan Gupta. Then the complainant and his mother were taken to a room in the Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -3- rear of the house. In the meantime, the father of the complainant who was taking a walk on the roof came down. The intruders terrorized the father of the complainant by showing him a revolver and asked him to stand quietly. The mother of the complainant in a state of terror gave `4 Lacs from the almirah, which was kept in a polythene bag. The intruders then searched the almirah of the house and tied them in the room by gagging their mouth with cloth. They closed the doors of all the three rooms and ran away while holding out threats to kill them. After some time, the mother of the complainant untied her hand and then untied the hands and feet of the father of the complainant. The complainant then came out and looked at the kitchen and felt some noise there on entering it. He saw in the kitchen store that the hands of Mishri Lal watchman were tied and a cloth had been put in his mouth. The complainant untied him. In the meantime, the father of the complainant through someone informed the Police Control Room. Then the complainant along with his mother went to Civil Hospital, Rohtak. On his return, he got his statement recorded which has been read over and was stated to be correct. The statement was attested by Wazir Singh Radhu, Police Post Arya Nagar, Rohtak. In terms of the FIR, the petitioner is stated to be amongst the boys, who had entered the house of the complainant so as to commit robbery at gun point. After registration of the FIR, the accused Rohit Khasa was arrested. On his disclosure statement, the petitioner was named as an accused and was arrested. The petitioner it is alleged alongwith the other co-accused committed robbery by entering the house of the complainant and took Rs. 4.00 lacs from the mother of the complainant. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rohtak, in his order dated 14.7.2010, has observed that four other cases are registered against the petitioner i.e. (1) FIR No. 196 of 2008 for the offence under Section 394 IPC at Police Station Rohtak, (2) FIR No. 260 of 2008 for the offence Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -4- under Sections 307 and 216 IPC at Police Station Sampla, (3) FIR No. 299 of 2008 for the offence under Sections 299 and 216 IPC at Police Station Sampla and (4) FIR No. 13 of 2009 for the offence under Sections 394 IPC at Police Station Panchkula. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the petitioner is not involved in any of the said case. It is submitted that first case mentioned by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge is FIR No. 196 of 2008 for the offence under section 394 IPC, registered at police station City Rohtak. A reference has been made to the order dated 19.6.2009 (Annexure P-3) passed by Learned Duty/Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak as regards FIR No. 196 dated 23.2.2009 for the offences under Section 394 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. It is submitted that the petitioner in fact was allegedly involved in FIR No. 196 dated 23.2.2009 and not FIR No. 196 of 2008 as referred to in the order dated 14.7.2010 of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak. The said FIR No. 196 of 23.2.2009 is against the petitioner Deepak Balhara son of Suraj Bhan. In the said FIR, the petitioner is an accused. However, a reading of the order dated 19.6.2009 (Annexure P-3) shows that an application was filed for discharge of the petitioner along with accused Rohit and Shri Bhagwan. It is stated that during investigation, the said accused including the petitioner were found innocent and, therefore, it was submitted that they were liable to be discharged. Accordingly, they were ordered to be released on bail subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- as the prosecution had still to file its final report in the case. The second FIR is mentioned in the order dated 14.7.2010 of Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak is FIR No. 260 of 2008 for the offences under Sections 307 and 216 IPC registered at Police Station Sampla. Reference has been made to the copy of the challan dated 18.1.2009 (Annexure P-5), in which the name of the petitioner is not mentioned as an Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -5- accused. The said FIR No. 260 dated 22.10.2008 is for the offences under sections 332, 353, 307 and 216 IPC, besides, Section 25 of the Arms Act. The third case referred to by the Learned Addl. Sessions Judge is FIR No. 299 of 2008 registered at Police Station Sampla for the offences under Sections 307 and 216 IPC. Learned counsel has referred to the copy of the challan dated 5.7.2009 (Annexure P-6) in respect of FIR No. 299 dated 28.11.2008, registered at Police Station, Sampla for the offences under Sections 307, 34 IPC besides Section 25 of the Arms Act. In the said challan, there are four accused and one of them is Deepak Nandal son of Dharambir. The name of the petitioner is Deepak Balhara son of Suraj Bhan. Therefore, he is not an accused in the said FIR. The fourth case referred by Learned Additional Sessions Juge, Rohtak is FIR No. 13 of 2009 for the offence under Section 394 IPC at Police Station, Panchkula. The petitioner has referred to the challan dated 21.5.2009 (Annexure P-7) in respect of FIR No. 13 dated 27.1.2009 registered at Police Station Panchkula. It is submitted that in the certified copy it has been inadvertently written as Police Station Sadar Jind, whereas the certified copy has been obtained from the Examiner/Assistant, Sessions Court, Panchkula and even the challan has been presented by the SHO, Police Station Sector-14 Panchkula on 21.5.2009. In the said case also, the petitioner is not an accused. Therefore, in one case, the petitioner has been discharged and in three other cases, he is not an accused. The trial in the present case is likely to take time. The involvement of the petitioner is to be established by leading evidence. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner on his furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak shall be admitted to bail. December 03, 2010 (S.S. SARON) Gurpreet JUDGE Crl. Misc. No. M-20804 of 2010 -6-