IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. MP (M) No.1388 of 2017.
Decided on: 16th December, 2017.
.
Dev Raj …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. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Virender Kumar Verma, Addl. Advocate
General.
SI Manmohan Singh, Police Station
r Sarkaghat, District Mandi, present in
person.
Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge (oral).
The present bail application has been moved by the petitioner
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on
bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 237 of 2017, dated
02.11.2017, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short
“IPC”), registered at Police Station, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P.
2. As per the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, 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, thus he may be released on bail.
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
16/12/2017 23:08:26 :::HCHP
2
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on
2.11.2017, prosecutrix made a complaint against the petitioner alleging
therein that on 11.7.2011, at about 11:00 AM, when the prosecutrix was
.
alone at home and her husband was out of station for his work of
carpenter, petitioner (accused) came to her house and forcibly committed
rape and also threatened her not to disclose this fact to anyone. The
petitioner black mailed the prosecutrix that if she will disclose this fact to
anyone, then he will open the nude picture of the prosecutrix to the
general public. On 13.11.2015, the petitioner again came to the house of
prosecutrix in the intoxicated state of mind and started abusing to her
husband and asked that your wife is under my control. Thereafter, the
prosecutrix alongwith her husband reported the matter to the police. The
statements of the witnesses were also recorded. Lastly, the prosecution
has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be rejected.
4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone
through the record, including the police report, carefully.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has
argued that there is a delay in lodging the FIR and infact, the petitioner
is innocent and is joining and co-operating in the investigation, as and
when required. He has also argued that by keeping the petitioner behind
the bars, no fruitful purpose will be served. He has further argued that
the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution
16/12/2017 23:08:26 :::HCHP
3
evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on
bail. On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General has
argued that taking into consideration the heinousness of the crime, the
.
bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.
6. After taking into consideration the facts, which has come on
record that the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation
and he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence
nor in a position to flee from justice, as the incidence is of the year 2015
and till date, he has not tampered with the prosecution evidence neither
flee from justice and now the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the
investigation, this Court finds that the present is a fit case, where the
judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, in the event of his
arrest, is required to be exercised in his favour. Under these
circumstances, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on bail, in the
event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 237 of 2017, dated 02.11.2017, under
Section 376 of IPC, registered at Police Station, Sarkaghat, District Mandi,
H.P., on his furnishing personal bond to the tune of `25,000/- (rupees
twenty five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The bail is granted subject to
the following conditions:
i. That the petitioner will join investigation of
case as and when called for by the
Investigating Officer in accordance with law.
ii. That the petitioner will not leave India without
prior permission of the Court.
16/12/2017 23:08:26 :::HCHP
4
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. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Copy dasti.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
th
16 December, 2017 Judge
(CS)
16/12/2017 23:08:26 :::HCHP