AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anoop Chitkara, J
FIR No.
Dated
Police Station
Police Station
83
6.2.2022
Sirsa, District Sirsa
285, 34 IPC and 25 Arms Act and later on added Sections 307, 387, 506, 120-B IPC
The petitioner, incarcerated upon his arrest in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail on merits and in the alternative on medical grounds of infection in the intestine.
In paragraph 9 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal antecedents:
Sr. No
FIR No.
Date/Year
Offences
Police Station
1
188
2018
323, 324, 326, 427, 452, 147, 148, 506 IPC
Sadar Sirsa
2
1168
2018
394, 392 IPC
City Sirsa
3
631
2019
323, 341, 34, 506 IPC
City Sirsa
4
109
2019
392, 394, 201, 120-B IPC
Sadar Sirsa
5
363
2020
25 Arms Act
Sadar Sirsa
6
489
2020
307, 148, 149 IPC and 25 Arms Act
City Sirsa
7
339
2020
397, 395 IPC and 25 Arms Act
Sadar Sirsa
8
81
2022
25 Arms Act
Sadar Sirsa
The complainant alleged that on 5th Feb 2022, at 9.30 PM, two persons fired multiple shots at the complainant’s house, which was recorded in CCTV. On the evening of 6th Feb 2022, the complainant received a phone call on his mobile. The caller claimed himself to be a member of the Lawrence Bishnoi group and proclaimed that he had been deputed to assassinate him, demanding a sum of fifty lacs rupees as protection money. The investigation found the petitioner’s involvement, and he was arrested.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
While opposing the bail, Ld. counsel representing the State contends that given the criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime once released on bail.
REASONING:
The petitioner has huge criminal antecedents. While considering bail petition of any violator of the penal law, who has a criminal history, it is an onerous responsibility of such court to act judiciously, keeping in mind the ground realities and also to decide the bail application with reasonableness because arbitrariness is the antithesis of law. To bring back the people with a sick mentality to the society’s fold, a criminal is not to be despised; but still, a balance has to be struck, and for a recidivist, the contours of a playing field are marshy and graver the criminal history, slushier the puddles. A perusal of the petition does not refer to any averment based on which this court is assured that if this recidivist is released on bail, he shall not indulge in criminal behavior. Apart from this, the allegations are grave, and the parameters for granting bail to first-time offenders and ordinary people stand on a much lower pedestal than that of gangsters and contract killers. In the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner fails to make a case for bail on merits.
Regarding bail on medical grounds, the jail authorities are obliged to give appropriate medical care to all prisoners. The gangsters are no exception to such a mandate flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
Petition dismissed. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.