SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

__________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 12 June, 2019

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFHIMACHALPRADESH,SHIMLA.

Cr.MP(M)No.968of2019

.
Decidedon:12.6.2019

SimpleKumar………..Petitioner
Versus

StateofHimachalPradesh……….Respondent

Coram:
Hon’bleMr.JusticeSandeepSharma,Judge.

Whetherapprovedforreporting?1
ForthePetitioner:Mr.VishwaBhushan,Advocate.
FortheRespondent:Mr.AshwaniSharmaandMr.Sanjeev
Sood,AdditionalAdvocateGenerals
withMr.SunnyDhatwalia,Assistant
rAdvocateGeneral.

SandeepSharma,Judge(oral):

BailpetitionernamelySimpleKumar,hasapproachedthis

CourtintheinstantproceedingsfiledunderSection439ofCr.PC,praying

thereinforgrantofregularbailinconnectionwithFIRNo.30/18dated

9.5.2018,underSection376ofIPCSection4ofPOCSOAct,registered,

atSadarWomenPoliceStationatBhiuli,DistrictMandi,H.P.

2.Sequeltoorderdated27.5.2019,passedbythisCourt,Sub

InspectorPawanKumar,WomenPoliceStation,Mandi,H.P.,hascome

presentinCourtalongwithrecordofthecase.Mr.SanjeevSood,learned

AdditionalAdvocateGeneral,hasalsoplacedonrecordstatusreport

1
Whetherthereportersofthelocalpapersmaybeallowedtoseethejudgment?

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
2

preparedonthebasisoftheinvestigationcarriedoutbytheinvestigating

agency.Recordperusedandreturned.

.

3.Closescrutinyoftherecord/statusreportrevealsthaton

9.5.2018,complainant-prosecutrix(hereinafterreferredtoas”the

prosecutrix”)gotherstatementrecordedunderSection154Cr.PC

allegingthereinthatsheisstudyingin8thClassatGovernmentMiddle

SchoolChhimbaBalahandinthemonthofJanuary,2018,(datenot

known),whileshewasgoingtoherhomeafterschool,bailpetitioner

forciblytookhertowardsthebushesandsexuallyassaultedheragainst

herwishes.Asperprosecutrix,sheaftertwodaysoftheallegedincident

informedherstepmotherwithregardtotheallegedincident,butshedid

nottakeanyaction.On7.5.2018,whenshewastakentohospitalbyhis

grandfatheronaccountofstomachache,ittranspiredthatsheis

pregnant.Afterhavingdiscoveredaforesaidfactumofpregnancy,

complainantgottheaforesaidstatementrecorded,onthebasisofwhich,

formalFIRNo.13/18dated9.5.2018,underSection376IPCandSectionof

thePOCSOAct,cametobelodgedatWomenPoliceStation,Mandi,

H.P.,againsttheaccusedandsincethen,bailpetitionerisbehindbars.

4.Recordrevealsthatinvestigationinthecaseiscomplete

andchallanstandsfiledinthecompetentcourtoflawandnothingis

requiredtoberecoveredfromthebailpetitioner.

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
3

5.Mr.VishwaBhushan,learnedcounselforthebailpetitioner

strenuouslyarguedthatnocasemuchlessunderSection376ofIPCis

.

madeoutagainstthebailpetitioner,whohasbeenfalselyimplicatedin

thecaseandassuch,deservestobeenlargedonbail.Whilereferringto

themedicalevidenceadducedonrecord,learnedcounselmadeserious

attempttopersuadethisCourttoagreewithhiscontentionthatatno

pointoftime,rape,ifany,wasevercommittedbythebailpetitioner,

rather,childinthewombofprosecutrixisnotofthepetitionerashasbeen

concludedintheDNAreport.Lastly,Mr.Bhushan,contendedthatsince

thebailpetitionerhassufferedformorethanoneyearwithouttherebeing

anyfaultofhim,instantapplicationdeservestobeallowed.

6.Mr.SanjeevSood,learnedAdditionalAdvocateGeneral,

whilefairlyadmittingthefactumwithregardtothereportofDNA,wherein

thebailpetitionerhasnotbeenshowntobethebiologicalfatherofthe

childinthewomboftheprosecutrix,contendedthatallegationofrape

leveledbytheprosecutrixisstillthereandassuch,DNAreportcannotbe

asolegroundtoarriveataconclusionthatatthetimeofalleged

incident,prosecutrixwasnotsubjectedtoforcibleintercoursebythebail

petitioner.Mr.Soodfurthercontendedthatkeepinginviewtheageof

theprosecutrix,whoatthetimeoftheallegedincidentwaslessthan12

yearsofage,bailpetitionerdoesnotdeserveanyleniency.

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
4

7.Havingheardlearnedcounselforthepartiesandperused

materialavailableonrecord,thoughthisCourtfindsthatatthetimeof

.

theallegedincident,prosecutrixwasoflessthan12yearsofage,but

havingtakennoteofthereportofDNAplacedonrecord,thisCourtfinds

thatchildinthewombofprosecutrixisnotofthebailpetitioner.Asper

ownstatementoftheprosecutrix,shebecamepregnantafterhaving

beenrapedbythebailpetitioner,whichstatementofherisnot

corroboratedbythemedicalevidenceadducedonrecordbythe

InvestigatingAgency.

8.Thoughaforesaidaspectsofthematteraretobe

consideredanddecidedbythecourtbelowonthebasisoftotalityof

evidencecollectedonrecordbytheprosecution,butthisCourthaving

perusedmaterialavailableonrecordatthisstage,seesnoreasontolet

thebailpetitionerincarcerateinjailforanindefiniteperiod.Repeatedly,

ithasbeenheldbytheHon’bleApexCourtaswellasthisCourtthattill

thetime,guiltofindividualisnotprovedinaccordancewithlaw,he/sheis

deemedtobeinnocentandinthecaseathandalso,guilt,ifany,ofthe

bailpetitionerisyettobeprovedinaccordancewithlawbythe

prosecutionbyleadingcogentandconvincingevidence.Itiswellsettled

thattillthetimeapersonisnotfoundguilty,he/sheisdeemedtobe

innocent.

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
5

9.Recently,theHon’bleApexCourtinCriminalAppealNo.

227/Section2018,DataramSinghvs.StateofUttarPradeshAnr.,decidedon

.

6.2.2018,hascategoricallyheldthatafundamentalpostulateofcriminal

jurisprudenceisthepresumptionofinnocence,meaningtherebythata

personisbelievedtobeinnocentuntilfoundguilty.Hon’bleApexCourt

furtherheldthatwhileconsideringprayerforgrantofbail,itisimportantto

ascertainwhethertheaccusedwasparticipatingintheinvestigationsto

thesatisfactionoftheinvestigatingofficerandwasnotabscondingornot

appearingwhenrequiredbytheinvestigatingofficer.

rHon’bleApex

Courthasfurtherheldthatifanaccusedisnothidingfromthe

investigatingofficerorishidingduetosomegenuineandexpressedfear

ofbeingvictimized,itwouldbeafactorthatajudgewouldneedto

considerinanappropriatecase.Therelevantparasoftheaforesaid

judgmentarereproducedasunder:

“2.Afundamentalpostulateofcriminaljurisprudenceisthe

presumptionofinnocence,meaningtherebythatapersonis
believedtobeinnocentuntilfoundguilty.However,thereare

instancesinourcriminallawwhereareverseonushasbeen
placedonanaccusedwithregardtosomespecificoffences
butthatisanothermatteranddoesnotdetractfromthe
fundamentalpostulateinrespectofotheroffences.Yet

anotherimportantfacetofourcriminaljurisprudenceisthat
thegrantofbailisthegeneralruleandputtingapersoninjail
orinaprisonorinacorrectionhome(whicheverexpression
onemaywishtouse)isanexception.Unfortunately,someof
thesebasicprinciplesappeartohavebeenlostsightofwith
theresultthatmoreandmorepersonsarebeingincarcerated
andforlongerperiods.Thisdoesnotdoanygoodtoour
criminaljurisprudenceortooursociety.

3.Thereisnodoubtthatthegrantordenialofbailisentirely
thediscretionofthejudgeconsideringacasebutevenso,the

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
6

exerciseofjudicialdiscretionhasbeencircumscribedbya
largenumberofdecisionsrenderedbythisCourtandby
everyHighCourtinthecountry.Yet,occasionallythereisa
necessitytointrospectwhetherdenyingbailtoanaccused

.

personistherightthingtodoonthefactsandinthe

circumstancesofacase.

4.Whilesointrospecting,amongthefactorsthatneedtobe
considerediswhethertheaccusedwasarrestedduring
investigationswhenthatpersonperhapshasthebest
opportunitytotamperwiththeevidenceorinfluence

witnesses.Iftheinvestigatingofficerdoesnotfinditnecessary
toarrestanaccusedpersonduringinvestigations,astrong
caseshouldbemadeoutforplacingthatpersoninjudicial
custodyafterachargesheetisfiled.Similarly,itisimportantto
ascertainwhethertheaccusedwasparticipatinginthe
investigationstothesatisfactionoftheinvestigatingofficerand

wasnotabscondingornotappearingwhenrequiredbythe
investigatingofficer.Surely,ifanaccusedisnothidingfrom
theinvestigatingofficerorishidingduetosomegenuineand
expressedfearofbeingvictimised,itwouldbeafactorthata
judgewouldneedtoconsiderinanappropriatecase.Itisalso

necessaryforthejudgetoconsiderwhethertheaccusedisa
first-timeoffenderorhasbeenaccusedofotheroffencesand

ifso,thenatureofsuchoffencesandhisorhergeneral
conduct.Thepovertyorthedeemedindigentstatusofan
accusedisalsoanextremelyimportantfactorandeven
Parliamenthastakennoticeofitbyincorporatingan
ExplanationtoSection436oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,
1973.Anequallysoftapproachtoincarcerationhasbeen

takenbyParliamentbyinsertingSection436AinSectiontheCodeof
CriminalProcedure,1973.

5.Toputitshortly,ahumaneattitudeisrequiredtobe
adoptedbyajudge,whiledealingwithanapplicationfor

remandingasuspectoranaccusedpersontopolicecustody
orjudicialcustody.Thereareseveralreasonsforthisincluding
maintainingthedignityofanaccusedperson,howsoever

poorthatpersonmightbe,therequirementsofSectionArticle21of
theConstitutionandthefactthatthereisenormous
overcrowdinginprisons,leadingtosocialandotherproblems
asnoticedbythisCourtinInRe-InhumanConditionsin1382

Prisons.

10.Needlesstosayobjectofthebailistosecurethe

attendanceoftheaccusedinthetrialandthepropertesttobeapplied

inthesolutionofthequestionwhetherbailshouldbegrantedorrefusedis

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
7

whetheritisprobablethatthepartywillappeartotakehistrial.

Otherwise,bailisnottobewithheldasapunishment.Otherwisealso,

.

normalruleisofbailandnotjail.Courthastokeepinmindnatureof

accusations,natureofevidenceinsupportthereof,severityofthe

punishmentwhichconvictionwillentail,characteroftheaccused,

circumstanceswhicharepeculiartotheaccusedinvolvedinthatcrime.

11.TheHon’bleApexCourtinSanjayChandraversusCentral

BureauofInvestigation(2012)1SupremeCourtCases49;heldasunder:-

“Theobjectofbailistosecuretheappearanceoftheaccused
personathistrialbyreasonableamountofbail.Theobjectofbail
isneitherpunitivenorpreventative.Deprivationoflibertymustbe

consideredapunishment,unlessitcanberequiredtoensurethat
anaccusedpersonwillstandhistrialwhencalledupon.The

Courtsowemorethanverbalrespecttotheprinciplethat
punishmentbeginsafterconviction,andthateverymanis
deemedtobeinnocentuntildulytriedanddulyfoundguilty.
Detentionincustodypendingcompletionoftrialcouldbea
causeofgreathardship.Fromtimetotime,necessitydemands
thatsomeunconvictedpersonsshouldbeheldincustody

pendingtrialtosecuretheirattendanceatthetrialbutinsuch
cases,”necessity”istheoperativetest.InIndia,itwouldbequite
contrarytotheconceptofpersonallibertyenshrinedinthe
Constitutionthatanypersonshouldbepunishedinrespectofany

matter,uponwhich,hehasnotbeenconvictedorthatinany
circumstances,heshouldbedeprivedofhislibertyupononlythe
beliefthathewilltamperwiththewitnessesifleftatliberty,save

inthemostextraordinarycircumstances.Apartfromthequestion
ofpreventionbeingtheobjectofrefusalofbail,onemustnotlose
sightofthefactthatanyimprisonmentbeforeconvictionhasa
substantialpunitivecontentanditwouldbeimproperforany
courttorefusebailasamarkofdisapprovalofformerconduct

whethertheaccusedhasbeenconvictedforitornotortorefuse
bailtoanunconvictedpersonfortheproposeofgivinghima
tasteofimprisonmentasalesson.”

12.InManoranjanaSinhAliasGuptaversusCBI2017(5)SCC

218,TheHon’bleApexCourthasheldasunder:-

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
8

“ThisCourtinSectionSanjayChandrav.CBI,alsoinvolvinganeconomic
offenceofformidablemagnitude,whiledealingwiththeissueof
grantofbail,hadobservedthatdeprivationoflibertymustbe
consideredapunishmentunlessitisrequiredtoensurethatan

.

accusedpersonwouldstandhistrialwhencalleduponandthat
thecourtsowemorethanverbalrespecttotheprinciplethat

punishmentbeginsafterconvictionandthateverymanis
deemedtobeinnocentuntildulytriedandfoundguilty.Itwas
underlinedthattheobjectofbailisneitherpunitiveorpreventive.
ThisCourtsoundedacaveatthatanyimprisonmentbefore

convictionhasasubstantialpunitivecontentanditwouldbe
improperforanycourttorefusebailasamarkofdisapprovalofa
conductwhetheranaccusedhasbeenconvictedforitornotor
torefusebailtoanunconvictedpersonforthepurposeofgiving
himtotasteofimprisonmentasalesson.Itwasenunciatedthat
sincethejurisdictiontograntbailtoanaccusedpendingtrialor

inappealagainstconvictionisdiscretionaryinnature,ithastobe
exercisedwithcareadcautionbybalancingthevaluablerightof
libertyofanindividualandtheinterestofthesocietyingeneral.It
waselucidatedthattheseriousnessofthecharge,isnodoubt
oneoftherelevantconsiderationswhileexaminingthe
applicationofbailbutitwasnotonlythetestorthefactorandthe

grantordenialofsuchprivilege,isregulatedtoalargeextentby
thefactsandcircumstancesofeachparticularcase.That

detentionincustodyofundertrialprisonersforanindefinite
periodwouldamounttoviolationofSectionArticle21oftheConstitution
washighlighted.”

13.TheHon’bleApexCourtinSectionPrasantaKumarSarkarv.Ashis

ChatterjeeandAnother(2010)14SCC496,haslaiddownthefollowing

principlestobekeptinmind,whiledecidingpetitionforbail:

(i)whetherthereisanyprimafacieorreasonablegroundto
believethattheaccusedhadcommittedtheoffence;

(ii)natureandgravityoftheaccusation;
(iii)severityofthepunishmentintheeventofconviction;
(iv)dangeroftheaccusedabscondingorfleeing,ifreleasedon
bail;

(v)character,behaviour,means,positionandstandingofthe
accused;
(vi)likelihoodoftheoffencebeingrepeated;
(vii)reasonableapprehensionofthewitnessesbeinginfluenced;
and

(viii)danger,ofcourse,ofjusticebeingthwartedbygrantofbail.

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP
9

14.Inviewoftheaforesaiddiscussionaswellaslawlaiddown

bytheHon’bleApexCourt,petitionerhascarvedoutacaseforgrantof

.

bail,accordingly,thepetitionisallowedandthepetitionerisorderedto

beenlargedonbailinaforesaidFIR,subjecttohisfurnishingpersonal

bondinthesumofRs.1,00,000/-withonelocalsuretyinthelikeamountto

thesatisfactionofconcernedChiefJudicialMagistrate/trialCourt,with

followingconditions:

(a)Heshallmakehimselfavailableforthepurposeofinterrogation,ifso
requiredandregularlyattendthetrialCourtoneachandeverydate
ofhearingandifpreventedbyanyreasontodoso,seekexemption
fromappearancebyfilingappropriateapplication;

(b)Heshallnottamperwiththeprosecutionevidencenorhamperthe

(c)

investigationofthecaseinanymannerwhatsoever;
Heshallnotmakeanyinducement,threatorpromisestoanyperson

acquaintedwiththefactsofthecasesoastodissuadehim/herfrom
disclosingsuchfactstotheCourtorthePoliceOfficer;and

(d)HeshallnotleavetheterritoryofIndiawithoutthepriorpermissionof
theCourt.

15.Itisclarifiedthatifthepetitionermisusesthelibertyorviolate

anyoftheconditionsimposeduponhim,theinvestigatingagencyshall

befreetomovethisCourtforcancellationofthebail.

16.Anyobservationsmadehereinaboveshallnotbeconstrued

tobeareflectiononthemeritsofthecaseandshallremainconfinedto

thedisposalofthisapplicationalone.Thepetitionstandsaccordingly

disposedof.

Copydasti.

12thJune,2019(SandeepSharma),
manjitJudge

13/06/201922:00:54:::HCHP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation