SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rahul Thakur vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 3 December, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

.
Cr.MP(M) No. 2146 of 2019.

Date of decision: December 03, 2019.

Rahul Thakur. …..Petitioner.
Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh. ……Respondent.

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge .

Whether approved for reporting? 1 No.

For the petitioner : Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. Narender Guleria and Mr.
Hemanshu Mishra, Addl. AGs.

ASI Dinesh Kumar, Women Police

Station, Mandi, in person.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge (Oral)

The petitioner is an accused in a case registered

against him in women Police Station, Mandi, District Mandi vide

FIR No. 46 of 2019, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code

with the allegations that he get acquaintance with the

complainant, the victim of occurrence, for the last few months.

They initially met with each other. Started thereafter

conversation with each other and ultimately fell in love. The
1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the
Judgment? yes.

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP
2

complaint is that the accused-petitioner expressed his desire to

solemnize marriage with the victim. He allured her at the pretext

.

of marriage and succeeded in establishing physical relations with

her. Thereafter also he continued in subjecting her to sexual

intercourse at the pretext of solemnizing marriage with her.

Lastly he came to her room on 28th October, 2019. After

establishing physical relations with her during that night also

29.10.2019. to
refused to solemnize marriage with her on the next day i.e.

It is with such allegations the FIR came to be

registered against the accused-petitioner.

2. The police after registration of the case has

conducted the investigation. The victim was produced before

learned Judicial Magistrate and her statement under Section 164

Cr.P.C. got recorded. On finding a case under Section 376 IPC

allegedly made out against the accused-petitioner, he was

arrested during midnight of 3rd November, 2019.

3. The investigation except for obtaining the report

from Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Mandi is almost

complete. The accused-petitioner though is stated to be not

required any further for the purpose of interrogation, however,

this application has been sought to be dismissed on the grounds,

inter alia, that the offence he committed is not only heinous but

grievous in nature. The apprehension of the Investigating

Agency is also that in the event of admitted on bail,he may

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP
3

tamper with the prosecution evidence and terrorize the

prosecution witnesses.

.

4. On analyzing the submissions made by learned

counsel representing the accused-petitioner and also learned

Additional Advocate General as well as going through the record

the present is a case where the victim of the occurrence is 24

years of age, hence major. The record itself reveal that the

Whether the

relations with her
r to
victim and the accused-petitioner were in love with each other.

accused-petitioner has established

fraudulently ad obtaining her consent by
physical

falsely representing that he will solemnize marriage with her are

the allegations which have to be proved against him by the

prosecution on the basis of the evidence to be produced during

the course of trial.

5. On the other hand, the present is a case where it

cannot be said that in the event of admitted on bail, the

accused-petitioner is likely to abscond or flee away from justice

because he is permanent resident of district Mandi and prior to

his arrest in this case was working as Probationary Officer in

Himachal Gramin Bank at Mandi. The apprehension of the

persecution that if admitted on bail, he may tamper with the

prosecution evidence and terrorize the prosecution witnesses is

also far fetched as the accused-petitioner is not a habitual

offender nor is there any past criminal history in his credit.

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP
4

6. Not only this, it has been brought to the notice of this

court by learned counsel on instructions from Shri Roop Lal, the

.

father of the accused-petitioner, present in the court, that if the

victim and her parents are ready and willing, the marriage of the

accused-petitioner will be solemnized with her. By chance, the

victim of the occurrence accompanied by her sister is also

present in the court. Though her parents are not present,

r as she to
however, she is also not averse to her marriage with the

accused-petitioner disclosed in the

development in the matter is also a mitigating circumstance so
Court. This

far as the magnitude of the offence allegedly committed by the

accused-petitioner is concerned because otherwise also as per

the statement of the victim herself made before the Magistrate

under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the accused-petitioner established

physical relations with her at the pretext that he will solemnize

marriage with her. Anyhow, leaving this aspect of the matter

open to be considered during the course of appropriate

proceedings, in case instituted, the present in the given facts and

circumstances is a fit case where the accused-petitioner

deserves to be admitted on bail.

7. Having said so, this application is allowed.

Consequently, the accused-petitioner, who has been arrested in

connection with the case registered against him vide FIR No. 46

of 2019 in Women Police Station, Mandi and presently detained in

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP
5

judicial custody is ordered to be released on bail subject to his

furnishing personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one surety

.

in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate/any other Judicial Magistrate at Mandi. He shall

further abide by the following conditions:-

That he shall:-

a. regularly attend the trial Court on each and every
date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to

do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing

appropriate application;

b. not to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor

hamper the investigation of the case in any
manner whatsoever;

c. not 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 Court or the Police officer; and

d. not leave the territory of India without the prior
permission of the Court.

8. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses his liberty

or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him; the

Investigating Agency shall be free to move this Court for

cancellation of the bail.

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP
6

9. The observations hereinabove shall remain confined

to the disposal of this petition and have no bearing on the merits

.

of the case. The application is accordingly disposed of.

(Dharam Chand Chaudhary),
Judge.

December 03, 2019,
( vs)

r to

05/12/2019 20:26:02 :::HCHP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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