Kartar Singh vs. State Of Haryana

Facts

The petitioner, Kartar Singh, sought regular bail under Section 439 CrPC in FIR No. 294 dated 28.08.2024, registered at Police Station Bilaspur, Yamuna Nagar, under various sections of the BNS and Section 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. The FIR was registered based on a complaint from the Mining Officer, Mines and Geology Department, Yamuna Nagar, alleging misuse of the H.M.G.I.S. portal. The complaint detailed how M/s R.K. Trading Company was issuing wrong e-rawanas (dispatches) for mining material, despite no such unit existing at the stated address. The State's reply alleged the petitioner was the "kingpin" and "master mind" behind a criminal conspiracy to create forged e-rawanas using loopholes in the portal, fictitious firms, and names of defunct companies, charging a fee for these fraudulent dispatches.

Held

The Court granted bail to the petitioner. While acknowledging the State's contention that there was sufficient prima facie evidence connecting the petitioner to the alleged crime, and that the petitioner's explanation was not satisfactory, the Court emphasized that pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. Considering the penal provisions invoked, the petitioner's pre-trial custody since 03.09.2024, and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Court found no justification for further pre-trial incarceration. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court held that the petitioner made a case for bail. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the interim bail granted on 04.02.2025 was made absolute.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 CrPC given the allegations of criminal conspiracy and misuse of the H.M.G.I.S. portal, and the prima facie evidence connecting him to the crime? Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. - Pre-trial incarceration would cause irreversible injustice. - The petitioner has voluntarily declared all his assets as per court order. - Bail should be granted with stringent conditions. Respondent's (State of Haryana) Arguments: - The petitioner is the "kingpin" and "master mind" behind the alleged offense. - The petitioner hatched a criminal conspiracy with a co-accused to create forged e-rawanas. - The petitioner had intimate knowledge of the portal's loopholes and used fictitious firms and defunct GST numbers. - The petitioner created fictitious e-rawanas for mining minerals without actual transactions and charged a fee. - There is sufficient prima facie evidence connecting the petitioner to the alleged crime.