SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Baldev Singh Bhandari vs State Of H.P on 21 May, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

.
SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No. 849 of 2019
Decided on : 21.5.2019

Baldev Singh Bhandari …..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. ….Respondent.

Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner: Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate.

For the respondent: Mr. Hemant Vaid Mr. Desh Raj
Thakur, Addl. A.Gs. with Mr. Y.S.
Thakur Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Dy.

A.G.

Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)

The instant petition has been instituted by the bail

petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C, wherethrough, he seeks the

indulgence of grant, of, pre­arrest bail, vis­à­vis him, in respect of,

FIR No. 28 of 2019, of, 9.5.2019, constituted under Section 354 of

the Indian Penal Code, and, under Section 3 (1) (R) (S), of, the

Schedule Caste, and, Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989, registered at Women Police Station, Pachhad, District

Sirmour, H.P.

1

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

24/05/2019 21:56:58 :::HCHP

2. On 15.5.2019, the bail applicant surrendered himself to

.

the jurisdiction of this Court and today, too, he has surrendered

himself to the jurisdiction of this Court, which comprises, and,

constitutes ‘deemed custody’, within, the meaning and ambit, of,

Section 439 Cr.P.C, for, hence rendering the instant petition

maintainable, under, the aforesaid provisions of law, there being a

statutory bar under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, against, the preferment of a petition

under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

3. The Investigating Officer, Dushyant Sarpal, Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Rajgarh, District Sirmour, H.P. is present

in Court, and, reports that the bail­applicant, has, rendered the

fullest cooperation to him, vis­a­vis, his conducting the

investigation, vis­a­vis, the offences, borne in the FIR. A perusal of

status report, placed on record, discloses that the ascription, vis­a­

vis, the bail­applicant qua his allegedly committing, the, offences

borne under Section 354 IPC, being generated, by the prosecutrix,

upon, hers, being allegedly pushed aside by the bail applicant,

while both were occupying the dais, at a public meeting, being

addressed at Saharan, by the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh.

The afore act made in full public view, and, in the competing effort

24/05/2019 21:56:58 :::HCHP
of, both hence to occupy, the, vantage position, of, being sighted

.

on the dais, along with the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh,

prima facie hence is not ingrained with any vice, of, malafides, and,

of, any tinge, of, any incriminatory role, rather, is prima facie

generated merely upon, both, the afore contesting to occupy the

center stage, along with Chief Minister, of, Himachal Pradesh.

Consequently, it is not deemed fit to order for the custodial

interrogation of the bail­applicant/petitioner, moreso, when there is

no material placed on record by the prosecution, that, in the event

of indulgence of pre­arrest bail being granted, to the petitioner/bail­

applicant, there is every likelihood of (a) his tampering with the

prosecution evidence, (b) influencing prosecution witnesses and (c)

fleeing from justice, hence the bail application is allowed, and, the

order rendered by this Court on 15.5.2019, is, made absolute,

subject to compliance by him with the following conditions:­

i) That he shall join the investigation, as and when

required by the Investigating agency;

ii) That he shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to the police;

24/05/2019 21:56:58 :::HCHP

iii) That he shall not leave India without the

.

previous permission of the Court;

iv) That he shall deposit their passports, if

any, with the Police Station, concerned;

v) That in case of violation of any of the
conditions, the bail granted to the

petitioners shall be forfeited and he shall
be liable to be taken into custody;

vi) That he shall apply for bail afresh when the

challan is filed before the trial Court.

vii) That upon his re­indulging in criminal activities,

it shall be open to the respondent, to move this

Court for cancellation of bail.

4. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken

as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial

Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation

made herein above.

Dasti copy.

(Sureshwar Thakur)
Judge
21st May, 2019
(kck)

24/05/2019 21:56:58 :::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