Procure Smartphone, Keep GPS On, Don't Delete WhatsApp History: Punjab & Haryana High Court's Bail Conditions For Accused In Bail Orders
While granting bail to an accused, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently imposed several conditions on the person: procure a smartphone, always keep the GPS turned on and do not format the phone or delete its WhatsApp chats or call logs. Justice Anoop Chitkara has imposed similar conditions in a number of orders passed in last one year. “Within fifteen days of release from...
While granting bail to an accused, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently imposed several conditions on the person: procure a smartphone, always keep the GPS turned on and do not format the phone or delete its WhatsApp chats or call logs.
Justice Anoop Chitkara has imposed similar conditions in a number of orders passed in last one year.
“Within fifteen days of release from prison, the petitioner shall procure a smartphone and inform its IMEI number and other details to the SHO/I.O. of the Police station mentioned above. The petitioner shall always keep the phone location/GPS on the “ON” mode. Whenever the Investigating officer asks to share the location, the petitioner shall immediately do so. The petitioner shall neither clear the location history, WhatsApp chats, call logs nor format the phone without permission of the concerned SHO/I.O. This condition shall continue till the completion of the trial or closure of case, whichever is earlier,” said the court.
The court added that in case of failure to comply with the condition, the complainant would be entitled to file any such application for the cancellation of bail, leading to the cancellation of the bail to the accused.
“Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days from release from prison and inform the Investigator about the compliance,” said the court in another condition.
The accused had filed an application for bail under Section 439 of the CrPC in an FIR registered against him under Sections 148, 149, 307 and 427 of the IPC and Section 25(1B) of the Arms Act.
The petitioner claimed bail on grounds of parity, arguing that similarly placed co-accused in the matter had already been given the benefit of bail.
Placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision in Sushila Agarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, 2020 5 SCC 1, among others, where the constitutional bench of the apex court has held that the courts can unusually impose restrictive conditions while granting bail, the High Court allowed bail to the accused subject to furnishing personal bond along with either one surety or a fixed deposit.
The court also relied on the Supreme Court decision in Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 279 of 2022, where it was held that the bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them, ensuring a balance between the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial.
Justice Chitkara has imposed identical conditions of the accused having to procure a smartphone in several other bail matters like Gursharanjit Singh @ Sunny v. State of Punjab and in Umed Singh v. State of Haryana.
In another decision reported by LiveLaw, Justice Chitkara, while granting bail to former MLA Simarjit Singh Bains in a rape case, ordered him to surrender all his weapons along with the arms license.
Case Title: Hussain Abbas alias Tippu v. State of Haryana
Case No: CRM-M-1210-2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 27
Coram: Justice Anoop Chitkara
Click Here To Read/Download the Order