SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Decided On : 18.6.2018 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 18 June, 2018



Cr.M.P(M) No. 688 of 2018

Decided on : 18.6.2018
Mohan Singh …Petitioner.

State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent.
Coram: r

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the Petitioner: Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate. 

For the Respondent: Mr.   Vikrant   Chandel   and   Mr.
Yudhveer   Singh   Thakur,   Deputy

Advocate General. 

ASI   Madan   Mohan,   P.S   Kasauli   in


Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)

The instant petition has been instituted by the bail

petitioner   under   Section   439   Cr.P.C,   for   his   being   released

from  judicial  custody,  wherein he is extantly lodged, for his

allegedly committing offences punishable, under, Section 354­
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

19/06/2018 23:01:10 :::HCHP


A  of  IPC,  and,  Section 8,10 of POCSO Act, in case FIR No.


30/18   of   26.4.2018,   registered   with   police   Station,   Kasauli,

District Solan, H.P. 

2. The   accused,   is,   the   step   father   of   the   minor

prosecutrix.     The   complainant,   sister   of   the   prosecutrix

ascribes   vis­a­vis   her   step   father,   an,   incriminatory  role,   of,

his,   on   23.4.2018   at   about   11­12   p.m.,   and,   on   24.4.2018   at

about   3­4   a.m.   hence   accessing   the   room,   where,   the   minor

prosecutrix   alongwith   her   sister   were   sleeping,   and,   his

pulling the legs of the minor prosecutrix. The aforesaid act of

the accused, may, prima­facie perse tantamount to his holding

the   apt   mens   rea,   of,   abusing   the   body   of   the   minor

prosecutrix,   emphatically,   when   two   years   prior   thereto,   he

committed a penal mis­demeanor, upon, the minor prosecutrix

and in respect whereof, he had tendered his apology. Though,

at this stage, it appears, of his, at the relevant time, rather

holding   the   apt   mens   rea,   nonetheless,   with   this   Court

proceeding,   to,   impose   the   hereinafter   stringent   conditions,

19/06/2018 23:01:10 :::HCHP

upon him (a)  qua barring him to enter the building, where the


minor   prosecutrix   is   residing,   for   ensuring   hers   not   being

encumbered   with   mental   trauma,   in   case   he   re­visits   the

building, whereat the minor prosecutrix, is lodged, and, (b) if

he   re­attemps   the   commission,   of,   offences,   thereupon   no

indulgence of bail being granted to him,   In face thereof, and,

in the face of the fact, that, the bail  petitioner is in judicial

custody   since   two   months,   thereupon,   it   would   not   be

appropriate,   to   prolong   his   judicial   custody,   as   any

prolongation thereof would unnecessarily curtail and fetter his


3. Moreover,   when   at   this   stage,   no   material,   has

been placed on record, by the prosecution, demonstrating that

in the event of bail being granted to the bail petitioner, there

being every likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering

with prosecution evidence, thereupon this Court is constrained

to afford, the facility of bail in favour of the bail petitioner.

Accordingly,  the bail applicant is ordered to be released from

19/06/2018 23:01:10 :::HCHP

judicial   custody,   subject   to   compliance   by   him   with   the


following conditions:­:

1. That he is barred to enter the building, where

the minor prosecutrix is residing, for ensuring hers

not being encumbered with mental trauma, in case

he   re­visits   the   building,   whereat   the   minor

prosecutrix, is lodged.

2. That   if   he   re­attemps   the   commission,   of,

offences,   thereupon   no   indulgence   of   bail   being

granted to him.

3. That   he   shall   furnish   personal   and   surety

bonds   in   the   sum   of   Rs.50,000/­   each,   to   the

satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan.

4. That   he   shall   join   the   investigation,   as   and

when required by the Investigating agency.

5. 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

19/06/2018 23:01:10 :::HCHP

dissuade   him   from   disclosing   such   facts   to   the


Court or to the Police. 

6. That   he   shall   not   leave   India   without   the

prior permission of the Court. 

7. That   he   shall   deposit   his   passports,   if   any,

r to
with the Police Station, concerned. 

That   in   case   of   violation   of   any   of   the

conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall

be forfeited and he  shall be liable to be taken into


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.  

Copy dasti.  

18th June, 2018.        ( Sureshwar Thakur ),
(priti)    Judge. 

19/06/2018 23:01:10 :::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