SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Cr.Mp(M) No. 1019 Of 2018 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 29 August, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No. 1019 of 2018
Decided on: 29th August, 2018
Sunny Sharma ….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. Dalip K. Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent/State: Mr. Ashwani Sharma and Mr. P.K.

Bhatti, Additional Advocates General.

_
Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. (oral).

The present bail application has been moved by the

petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking

his release in case FIR No. 56 of 2015, dated 02.06.2015, under

Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, Police Station

Kandaghat, District Solan, 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

resident of District Shimla and 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

02.06.2015 the prosecutrix (name withheld) made a statement before

1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

30/08/2018 21:37:40 :::HCHP
2

the police, wherein she stated that she is a student of 9th class and she

met the petitioner in a marriage ceremony. Thereafter, she used to talk

with the petitioner on telephone. The prosecutrix has further stated

.

that on 30.05.2015 there was jaagran (a religious function) in her

house and the petitioner came there. At about 12:00 mid night, she

went to attend the call of nature and the petitioner followed him. The

petitioner took her to nearby Community Centre Building, where they

initially talked for 10-15 minutes, but, later on, the petitioner forcibly

committed sexually intercourse with her. Subsequently, the

prosecutrix came to her home and due to fear she did not divulge this

fact to anyone. On the subsequent morning, the prosecutrix narrated

the incident to her mother and the police was informed. On the anvil

of the statement of the prosecutrix, a case was registered and

investigation ensued. Police prepared the spot map and the statements

of the witnesses were recorded. The prosecutrix was medically

examined and record qua date of birth of the prosecutrix was procured.

The petitioner was also medically examined. The statement of the

prosecutrix was also got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The

petitioner, through his disclosure statement, got recovered a condom.

As per the medical examination, possibility of sexual intercourse can

not be ruled out. The investigation revealed that at the time of

occurrence, the prosecutrix was fourteen years and four months of age.

As per the prosecution, the challan stands presented in the Court.

30/08/2018 21:37:40 :::HCHP
3

Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail application be

dismissed.

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 has been falsely implicated in the case in

hand. The petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the

prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has

further argued that the petitioner is resident of Shimla District and he

cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period. Conversely,

the learned Additional Advocate General has argued the petitioner has

committed a serious offence and in case he is enlarged on bail he may

flee from justice any may also tamper with the prosecution evidence. It

is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

6. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, the fact

that he is behind the bars for the last three years, he is resident of

District Shimla and neither in a position to tamper with the

prosecution evidence, nor in a position to flee from justice and also

considering the manner in which the crime is alleged to have been

perpetrated and also considering the material, which is emanating from

the records and without discussing the same, this Court finds that the

present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner

30/08/2018 21:37:40 :::HCHP
4

on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Therefore, it is ordered

that the petitioner be released forthwith on bail, on his furnishing

personal bond to the tune of `50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only)

.

with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned

Trial Court, in case FIR No. 56 of 2015, dated 02.06.2015, under

Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, Police Station

Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P. 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 or promise 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.

7. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

Copy dasti.

(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
29th August, 2018 Judge
(virender)

30/08/2018 21:37:40 :::HCHP

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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