Rajinder Sharma vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Mahinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner-Rajinder Sharma son of Mange Ram, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, namely Om Parkash Jain son of Chuni Lal Jain and Zile Ram Sharma son of Indraj Sharma, vide R.C. No. 0512012S0007 dated 25.09.2012, on accusation of having committed an offence punishable u/s 306 IPC by the Central Bureau of Investigation(CBI) SCB, Chandigarh.

Notice of the petition was issued to the respondent.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

Tersely, the prosecution claimed that the petitioner was working as a private P.A. with Om Parkash Jain, Cabinet Minister in the Haryana Government. On 24.07.2010, Karam Singh (deceased) son of Kashi Ram, was stated to have approached one Sanjay Jain, resident of village Gharaunda, in connection with the job of Clerk of his relative Sandeep son of Chamel Singh, in the Rest House, Karnal. Sanjay Jain advised him to meet the Minister Om Parkash Jain and he will telephonically inform him in this respect. Thereafter, Karam Singh was claimed to have gone to Panipat and contacted the petitioner. As advised by Atul Jain, son of Om Parkash Jain, he(Karam Singh) again went to Panipat on the following day and had apprised Om Parkash Jain, Cabinet Minister, in regard to the indicated job of Sandeep. Om Parkash Jain handed over the relevant papers to the petitioner for necessary action. Then, the petitioner had asked him that he had to pay a sum of Rs. 5 lacs for getting the job to his relative Sandeep. Subsequently, Chamel Singh, father of Sandeep, had agreed and gave a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- to him (Karam Singh). The amount was stated to have been paid to the petitioner for the purpose of getting job to his relative Sandeep.

Likewise, it was averred that complainant Rajinder son of Karam Singh (deceased) (for short "the complainant") had also applied for the post of Conductor in Haryana Roadways. In the same manner, the petitioner had asked him to pay a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- for his job, but the matter was settled for a sum of Rs. 6 lacs in two instalments. Karam Singh was stated to have paid another sum of Rs. 3 lacs to the petitioner. Neither, Sandeep, relative nor Rajinder son of Karam Singh (deceased) actually got the job, so, Karam Singh asked the petitioner to return, but the pointed amount was not returned to him. Consequently, he moved the complaint dated 6.6.2011 (Annexure P-5) to The Superintendent of Police, Panipat, in this regard. Similar applications were also moved to Deputy Commissioner and other higher authorities.

Similarly, the case of the prosecution further proceeds that on 7.6.2011, Karam Singh was lying in an injured condition with froth coming out of his mouth, near the ground adjacent to National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal. Subsequently, Karam Singh died. Suspecting the murder of his father, initially, complainant Rajinder has lodged a criminal case against the accused, vide FIR No. 439 dated 7.6.2011, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 323 read with section 34 IPC in Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal. However, the complainant did not feel satisfied with the investigation carried out by the Haryana police and in the wake of CWP, bearing No. 23980 of 2011 filed by him, the investigation of the case was transferred to CBI by this Court.

During the course of investigation, the CBI concluded and rejected the theory of murder of Karam Singh, as projected by the complainant and came to a definite conclusion that the accused had not murdered the father of the complainant. In fact, he(Karam Singh) had committed suicide by consuming aluminium phosphate and the accused had abetted the commission of crime of suicide. In the background of these allegations, the CBI has registered and investigated a fresh criminal case against the petitioner and his other co-accused, namely, Om Parkash Jain, Cabinet Minister and Zile Ram Sharma, MLA, for the commission of an offence punishable u/s 306 IPC. After completion of the investigation, the CBI submitted the final police report(challan) (Annexure P-2) against the accused in the manner described here-in-above. They were accordingly charge-sheeted for committing an offence punishable u/s. 306 IPC by the trial Court.

Meaning thereby, the crux of the CBI version is that the petitioner while working as a private P.A., received the amount on behalf of Om Parkash Jain, Cabinet Minister, to arrange the job, in question. Neither they have managed the job nor returned the amount to Karam Singh, which compelled him to commit suicide. Even if, the version of the CBI is believed to be true as such, as to whether all the essential ingredients of abetment of suicide are complete, in order to attract the penal provision of Section 306 IPC against the petitioner or not, inter alia, would be a moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial Court. In other words, it remained an unfolded mystery as to how, when and in what manner, the petitioner has abetted the commission of crime of suicide by Karam Singh.

Be that as it may, indisputedly, the CBI did not feel the necessity to arrest the petitioner during the course of investigation, at any stage. He himself surrendered after submission of final police report (challan) by the CBI in the Court on 21.09.2013. Since then, he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. There are more than 160 prosecution witnesses to be examined and numerous documents are yet to be proved by the CBI during the trial. Therefore, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

Not only that, it is not a matter of dispute that Om Parkash Jain, Cabinet Minister, co-accused of the petitioner, was granted the concession of regular bail by this Court in this case, by means of order dated 15.05.2014, rendered in CRM No. M-6239 of 2014, whereas his another co-accused Zile Ram Sharma was allowed bail, by virtue of order dated 23.05.2014 by the trial Court. In that eventuality, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit of regular bail to the present petitioner as well under the similar set of circumstances.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side, during the course of trial of main case, the instant petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner is hereby accepted. He is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to further filing an affidavit to the effect that he will regularly attend the proceedings in the trial Court. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court. He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court.

Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect on the merits of the main case, in any manner, as the same has been so recorded for the limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail only. At the same time, in case, the petitioner violates any terms and conditions of the order of bail/bail bonds, then, the prosecution/CBI/complainant would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail in this Court.