Puran Chand vs State Of H.P

Anoop Chitkara, J

An under-trial prisoner, facing trial for committing murder, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 (CrPC), seeking regular bail because he is suffering from multifarious ailments.

The bail petition is silent about criminal history, however, Mr. Vivek Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the bail petitioner states, on instructions, that the

petitioner has no criminal past. The status report also does not mention any criminal past of the accused.

Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General submits that in case this Court grants interim bail to the petitioner then the Court must

specify the date on which the petitioner would surrender.

Para 4 of the bail petition reads as follows:

“That the petitioner is about 64 years of age and is suffering from multifariousailments.

The petitioner is under regular treatment from IGMC. The copies of medical record of petitioner are being annexed herewith as Annexure P-1 (colly).

The typed copy of the relevant report of the treating doctor is annexed herewith as Annexure P-1/A.

The petitioner is not keeping good health. Though the jail authorities are taking care of the petitioner as far as medical treatment is concerned but it is

respectfully submitted that the petitioner is to undergo operations of Kidney and Gall bladder as there are stones of various sizes in his kidney and Gall

bladders.

The petitioner at all times remains in pain and sometimes is even cannot perform his daily pursuits.

Due to ill health petitioner is going in depression and requires proper treatment in a healthy and conducive atmosphere which cannot be there while in

custody.

Recently the family of the petitioner has visited the jail and found that the petitioner has become very weak and seems to be under mental trauma.

The family of the petitioner intends to get himself checked thoroughly in some good medical institution for his existing ailments.â€​

Given the facts and circumstances mentioned above, and without commenting on the case's merits, given the circumstances peculiar to this case,

the petitioner makes a case for release on bail up to 30th September, 2021.

In Manish Lal Shrivastava v State of Himachal Pradesh, CrMPM No. 1734 of 2020, after analysing judicial precedents, this Court observed that

any Court granting bail with sureties should give a choice to the accused to either furnish surety bonds or give a fixed deposit, with a further option to

switch over to another.

The petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR mentioned above, subject to his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/-),

and shall furnish one surety of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/-), to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate having the jurisdiction over the

Police Station conducting the investigation, and in case of non-availability, any Ilaqa Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned

Magistrate must satisfy that in case the accused fails to appear in Court, then such surety is capable to produce the accused before the Court, keeping

in mind the Jurisprudence behind the surety, which is to secure the presence of the accused.

In the alternative, the petitioner may furnish a personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/-), and fixed deposit(s) for Rs. Ten thousand only

(INR 10,000/-), made in favour of Chief Judicial Magistrate of the concerned district.

a) Such Fixed deposits may be made from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 50%, or any of the stable private banks, e.g.,

HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, etc., with the clause of automatic renewal of principal, and liberty of the interest reverting to the

linked account.

b) Such a fixed deposit need not necessarily be made from the account of the petitioner and need not be a single fixed deposit.

c) If such a fixed deposit is made in physical form, i.e., on paper, then the original receipt shall be handed over to the concerned Court.

d) If made online, then its printout, attested by any Advocate, and if possible, countersigned by the accused, shall be filed, and the depositor shall get

the online liquidation disabled.

e) The petitioner or his Advocate shall inform at the earliest to the concerned branch of the bank, that it has been tendered as surety. Such information

be sent either by e-mail or by post/courier, about the fixed deposit, whether made on paper or in any other mode, along with its number as well as FIR

number.

f) After that, the petitioner shall hand over such proof along with endorsement to the concerned Court.

g) It shall be total discretion of the petitioner to choose between surety bonds and fixed deposits.

h) Subject to the proceedings under S. 446 CrPC, if any, the entire amount of fixed deposit along with interest credited, if any, shall be

endorsed/returned to the depositor(s). Such Court shall have a lien over the deposits.

The attesting officer shall, on the reverse page of personal bonds, mention the permanent address of the petitioner along with the phone number(s),

WhatsApp number (if any), e-mail (if any), and details of personal bank account(s) (if available).

The petitioner shall not influence, browbeat, pressurize, make any inducement, threat, or promise, directly or indirectly, to the witnesses, the Police

officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts of the case, to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police, or the Court, or to

tamper with the evidence.

The petitioner should stay far away from the place of occurrence while on bail. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the

accused to incapacitate, influence, or to cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigation,

2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bhatt v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 230.

The petitioner shall surrender in prison from where he was released, on or before 30.9.2021, by 4 pm and shall also hand over the treatment

slips/medical records to the Superintendent Jail.

Any Advocate for the petitioner and the Officer in whose presence the petitioner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all conditions of

this bail order, in vernacular and if not feasible, in Hindi.

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order for furnishing bonds. Any Advocate for the petitioner can download this order along with

the case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. In case the attesting officer or the Court wants to verify the

authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

In the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the petition is allowed in the terms mentioned above.

Copy Dasti.