IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No. 914 of 2018
Decided on: 7th August, 2018
Sanjay Kumar ….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. Prashant Chaudhary, 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. 70 of 2018, dated 14.05.2018, under

Sections 376 and 506 IPC, registered in Police Station, Barsar, 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

resident of the place 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

14.05.2018 the prosecutrix (name withheld) made a written complaint

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

08/08/2018 23:01:13 :::HCHP
2

to the police, wherein she alleged that the petitioner, who is friend of

her husband, about one and half year back, when she was alone, came

to their house and made her to eat a chocolate. Thereafter, the

.

prosecutrix fell unconscious and the petitioner committed rape on her.

The prosecutrix has further alleged that thereafter the petitioner many

times sexually assaulted her and also threatened her. The petitioner

also took `15,000/- from the prosecutrix and he used to demand

money from her. On the basis of the complaint, so made by the

prosecutrix, police registered a case and the investigation ensued.

Statements of the witnesses were recorded.

r The prosecutrix was

medically examined and her statement was also recorded under

Section 164 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was arrested on 14.05.2018. The

police effected the recoveries and spot maps of the places, where the

prosecutrix was allegedly sexually assaulted, were made. Samples

were sent for chemical analysis and result thereof is still awaited. After

conclusion of the investigation, the police found involvement of the

petitioner in the alleged offence. As per the prosecution, 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. Now, the

challan stands presented in the Court and it is listed on 14.08.2018 for

checking of documents. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the

bail application may be dismissed.

08/08/2018 23:01:13 :::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 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. It is further

argued that the petitioner is resident of the place and he cannot be

kept behind the bars for an unlimited period. Conversely, the learned

Additional Advocate General has argued that in case the petitioner is

released on bail, he may flee from justice. The petitioner has

committed a serious offence, thus the bail application of the petitioner

may be dismissed.

6. At this moment, after considering the overall facts of the

case, which have come on record and also taking into consideration the

age of the petitioner as also of the prosecutrix, the manner in which the

alleged offence is stated to have been committed and the fact that the

petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper

with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so

this Court finds that it would not be apt to keep the petitioner behind

the bars for an unlimited period. Thus, the present is a fit case where

the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be

exercised in his favour. Therefore, it is ordered that the petitioner be

08/08/2018 23:01:13 :::HCHP
4

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. 70

.

of 2018, dated 14.05.2018, under Sections 376 and 506 IPC, registered

in Police Station, Barsar, District Hamirpur, 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)

7th August, 2018 Judge
(virender)

08/08/2018 23:01:13 :::HCHP