SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Madan Lal vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 28 November, 2018



Cr.M.P(M) No.1577 of 2018

Decided on : 28.11.2018.


Madan Lal          …..Petitioner. 
State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent.

Whether approved for reporting?1
r to
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.

For the Petitioner: Mr. Kishore Pundeer, Advocate. 

For the Respondent: Mr.   Hemant   Vaid,   Additional
Advocate General with Mr. Desh Raj

Thakur,   Additional   Advocate
General   and   Mr.   Vikrant   Chandel

and   Mr.   Yudhveer   Singh   Thakur,
Deputy Advocate Generals. 

ASI   Raghubir   Singh,   P.S   Pachhad,
District Sirmaur, H.P, in person. 


Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)
The instant petition, stands instituted by the bail

applicant, under, Section 438 Cr.P.C, wherein he seeks grant

of   anticipatory   bail   qua   him,   given   his   apprehending   his

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

01/01/2009 08:04:31 :::HCHP


arrest, for his allegedly committing offences punishable, under


Sections 376, and, section 506 of the I.P.C registered in case

FIR No. 78 of 2018 of 1.11.2018, with Police Station, Pachhad,

District Sirmaur, H.P.

2.      The   reason   for   this   Court   proceeding,   to,   afford

facility   of   bail,   to   the   bail   applicant,   is,   embedded   in   the

factum of (a) the prosecutrix alleging qua hers being subjected

to forcible sexual intercourse by the bail applicant, in, the year

2016,   without,   hers specifying the date  or the month  of  the

aforesaid year, whereat the afore alleged penal misdemeanors

stood   perpetrated,   upon   her   person   (b)   the   afore   lack   of

enunciation,   with,   precision   in   the   FIR   also   concomitantly

render   her   allegations   being   construable   to   be   both   vague,

and, nebulous.

3. The delay in lodging of the FIR is immense, and,

therefrom   an   inevitable   inference,   is   gatherable   qua   the

prosecutrix, meting consent to the sexual intercourse, which

stood allegedly forcibly perpetrated on her person, by the bail

01/01/2009 08:04:31 :::HCHP

applicant.     Even   though   she   metes   an   explanation,   for   the


afore  delay,  yet  the explanation is comprised in the factum,

qua   upon   hers   reporting   the   matter   to   the   police   hence

attracting   social  stigma   upon  her,  yet  the  afore  explanation

rather prima­facie, appears to be vague, and, acquires an aura

of   falsity,   given   hers   being   a   married   lady,   and,   when   she

could   well   earlier   disclose   the   matter   to   the   elders   of   her

family, or, to her husband.   

4. The Investigating Officer  has also intimated

this Court that the accused had rendered to him, his fullest

cooperation.   Consequently,   given   the   bail   applicant,   hence,

rendering the fullest cooperation to the Investigating Officer,

and, also with investigations into the alleged offences, being

complete,   besides   when   at   this   stage,  no   material   stands

placed by the prosecution, demonstrating, that in the event of

bail   being   granted   to   the   bail   applicant,   there   being   every

likelihood   of   his   fleeing   from   justice   or   tampering   with

prosecution   evidence,   thereupon   the   indulgence   of   bail   is

01/01/2009 08:04:31 :::HCHP

granted   to   the   bail   applicant,   and,   the   order   rendered   on


20.11.2018 is confirmed, on, the following conditions:­

1. That he shall join the investigation, as

and   when   required   by   the   Investigating

2. 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   dissuade   him   from   disclosing

such facts to the Court or to the Police;

3. That he shall not  leave  India without

the previous permission of the Court; 

4. That   he   shall   deposit   his   passport,   if

any, with the Police Station, concerned;

5. 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 custody;

6. That   he   shall   apply   for   bail   afresh
when   the   challan   is   filed   before   the   trial

5. In view of above, petition stands disposed of.  Any

observation   made   herein   above   shall   not   be   taken   as   an

01/01/2009 08:04:31 :::HCHP

expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial


Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation

made herein above. 

Dasti Copy. 

28th November, 2018.        ( Sureshwar Thakur ),

(priti)    Judge. 

01/01/2009 08:04:31 :::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