SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Decided On : October 03 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 3 October, 2018


   Cr.MP(M) No.1188 of 2018


                       Decided on : October 03, 2018
Raman Kaushal ….Petitioner

State of Himachal Pradesh       …Respondent  


The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice.

Whether approved for reporting?    1

For the Petitioner      :      Mr. Y.K. Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondent   :       Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Additional Advocate 

Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (oral)

ASI Sohan Lal 1/C  PP Sarswati Nagar P.S. Jubbal,

District Shimla, HP is present alongwith record.    

2. Undisputedly,   petitioner   has   joined   the   investigation;

fully  cooperated  and  no  further  recovery  is  required  to be  effected

from   the  petitioner.     Also,  it   is  not  in   dispute  that  petitioner   is  a

permanent resident of the State of Himachal Pradesh and there is no

possibility of the petitioner absconding or influencing the witnesses

and interfering with the course of investigation. No doubt, allegations

made   by   the   prosecutrix   are   serious   but   considering   over   all

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

04/10/2018 22:58:19 :::HCHP

attending facts and circumstances, more so, that both the petitioner

and the prosecutrix are adult; were having relationship continuous in


nature   over   a   period   of   time   and   were   frequent   each   other

continuously   over   a   period   of   time,   and   perhaps   resultant   dispute

having   arisen   over   a   particular   issue   leading   to   the   filing   of   the

complaint, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has

made out a case for grant of interim bail.

3.   On   12.9.2018,   this   Court   passed   an   interim   order

directing the petitioner to be released on interim bail, subject to his

complying   with   the   conditions   imposed   therein.     The   said   interim

order is in operation till date.   

4. Learned Additional Advocate General, under instructions

from   the   Investigating   Officer,   states   that   investigation   is   in


5.  Mr. Y.K Thakur,  learned Counsel states that  petitioner

shall make himself available for investigation at Police Station,   as

and when directed.  

6. Having   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   as   also

perused the record, I am of the considered view that petitioner has

made out a case for confirmation of interim order dated 12.9.2018.

04/10/2018 22:58:19 :::HCHP

Petitioner   is   permanent   resident   of   State   of   H.P.   and   during

investigation has fully cooperated and there is no likelihood of his


fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court in the event of trial

being initiated against him.  There is nothing on record to highlight

the   past   criminal   conduct   of   the   petitioner.   His   custodial

interrogation is not required at all.

7. The principle for grant of bail is now well settled.   The

normal rule is bail and not jail.  But then, while granting bail, Court

has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, nature of evidence in

support   thereof,   severity   of   the   punishment   which   conviction   will

entail, character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to

the   accused,   reasonable   possibility   of   securing   the   presence   of   the

accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being

tampered   with,   the   larger   interests   of   the   public/State   and   other

similar considerations.

8. Apex   Court   in  Prasanta   Kumar   Sarkar   versus   Ashis

Chatterjee   and   another,  (2010)   14   SCC   496,   has   laid   down   the

following principles to be kept in mind, while deciding petition for


04/10/2018 22:58:19 :::HCHP

(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground
to believe that the accused had committed the offence; 

(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; 


(iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;

(iv)   danger   of   the   accused   absconding   or   fleeing,   if

released on bail; 

(v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of
the accused; 

(vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated;

(vii)   reasonable   apprehension   of   the   witnesses   being

influenced; and 

(viii) danger, of course, of justice being         thwarted by

grant of bail.

9. Having holistically considered the nature of offence and

the   relevant   attending   circumstances   in   favour   of   the   petitioner­

accused, and also in view of the law discussed, herein above, I feel

that it is a fit case in which petitioner should be enlarged on bail.

10. For   all   the   aforesaid   reasons,   interim   order   dated

12.9.2018,   is   made   absolute,   subject   to   the   conditions   laid   down

therein.   Needless   to   add,   petitioner   is   not   likely   to   flee   from   the

territorial jurisdiction of the country.  The petitioner shall be on bail

till such time Challan is presented in the Court for trial where after

he shall approach the Court for regular bail, in accordance with law.

04/10/2018 22:58:19 :::HCHP

Needless to add, during this period petitioner shall fully comply with

all the statutory conditions laid down under the provisions of Section


438 of the Cr.P.C.   As a matter of abundant caution, it is clarified

that   petitioner   shall   neither   tamper   with   the   evidence   nor   try   to

influence   the   witnesses.     He   shall   make   himself   available   for

investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. He

shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.  

11. 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


12. With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands

disposed of.  

13 Liberty   reserved   to   the   State   to   revive   the   petition   or

seek cancellation of the bail, if need so arises subsequently.  

Copy Dasti.   

                    (Sanjay Karol),
October 03, 2018 (cm)    Acting Chief Justice.    

04/10/2018 22:58:19 :::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