IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 192 of 2018
Decided on: 19th March, 2018
.
Balbir Singh @ Aman ….Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate.
For the respondent/State: Mr. Ashwani Sharma and Mr. P.K.
Bhatti, Additional Advocates General,
with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.
_
Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. (oral).
The present bail application has been maintained by the
petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking
his release in case FIR No. 300 of 2017, dated 23.11.2017, under
Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, registered at Police
Station Sadar Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P.
2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is
neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a
position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail.
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on
23.11.2017 the complainant, Smt. Reeta Kumari, made a written
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
19/03/2018 23:03:29 :::HCHP
2
complaint to the police, wherein it was averred that her daughter
(prosecutrix), aged approximately 17 years, is doing training in fashion
designing from Hamirpur. On 13.11.2017 the prosecutrix went from
.
home to Hamirpur alongwith one Arkishta. On the same day the
prosecutrix stayed in her room at Hamirpur alongwith her friends. On
21.11.2017, the complainant received a telephone call informing her
that the prosecutrix is not coming to college. The complainant
apprehended that the petitioner, who is resident of New Indira Colony,
Manimajara, Chandigarh, took the prosecutrix. On the basis of the
complaint, so made by the complainant, a case was registered and the
investigation ensued. The mobile location of the prosecutrix was found
at Hasanpur, District Palval, Haryana. The petitioner was arrested
from New Indira Colony, Manimajara, Chandigarh. On 28.11.2017, the
prosecutrix was medically examined and the doctor opined that she
has been sexually assaulted. Statement of the prosecutrix was also
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was also medically
examined. The petitioner is in judicial custody after his arrest. As per
the police, the challan stands presented in the Court. The petitioner is
very clever person and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper
with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, as he is
resident of different State. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the
bail application may be dismissed.
19/03/2018 23:03:29 :::HCHP
3
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned
Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record,
including the police report, carefully.
.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the
petitioner is innocent and he is neither in a position to tamper with the
prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has
further argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him
behind the bars for an unlimited period. Conversely, the learned
Additional Advocate General has argued that taking into consideration
seriousness of the offence, the application of the petitioner may be
dismissed.
6. In rebuttal the learned counsel for the petitioner have
argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an
unlimited period. He has further argued that the petitioner is neither
in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position
to flee from justice, so he may be enlarged on bail.
7. At this stage taking into considering the statements of the
witnesses, which have come on record, including the statement of the
prosecutrix, police record, age of the prosecutrix and overall aspect of
the case, including the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to
tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from
justice, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial
discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in
19/03/2018 23:03:29 :::HCHP
4
his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that
the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in connection with
FIR No. 300 of 2017, dated 23.11.2017, under Sections 363, 376 IPC
.
and Section 4 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Sadar
Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., he shall be released on bail
forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the
sum of `50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. The bail is granted
subject to the following conditions:
(i) That the petitioner will appear before the
learned Trial Court as and when required.
(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India
without prior permission of the Court.
(iii) That the petitioner will not directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat orpromise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade
him/her from disclosing such facts to the
Investigating Officer or Court.
8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
Copy dasti.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
19th March, 2018 Judge
(virender)
19/03/2018 23:03:29 :::HCHP