SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rohit Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 27 November, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No. 2108 of 2019
Decided on: 27th November, 2019

.

Rohit Kumar ….Petitioner

Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.

For the petitioner: Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Advocate.

For the respondent/State: Mr. P.K. Bhatti, Additional Advocate
General, with Mr. Raju Ram Rahi and Mr.
r Gaurav Sharma, Deputy Advocates General.

ASI Hem Raj, I.O. Police Station Kala Amb,

Sirmour, District Nahan, H.P.

Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. (oral).

The present bail application has been maintained by the

petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his

release in case FIR No. 170 of 2019, dated 20.09.2019, under Sections 376

IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, Sirmour, District Nahan, H.P.

2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is

innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is neither

in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to

flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind

the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

1

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

27/11/2019 20:25:18 :::HCHP
2

3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on

20.09.2019 the prosecutrix (name withheld) made a written complaint to

the police, wherein she alleged that she is 29 years old and resident of

.

Haryana. The prosecutrix further stated that for the last 14 years she used

to reside in a rented accommodation at Moginand, Nahan. She used to

work in factories and about three years back she came in contact with the

petitioner, who hails from District Mainpuri, U.P. The petitioner told her

that he is unmarried and wants to marry her. Gradually, the petitioner

gained the trust of the prosecutrix and taking advantage of trust, he had

sexual intercourse with her in the rented accommodation. The petitioner

told her that he will have a word with his parents qua their marriage and he

regularly sexually molested the prosecutrix. Lastly, on 06.08.2019 the

petitioner went to his home and told her that he will soon marry her.

Thereafter, the petitioner stopped picking up the telephonic calls of the

prosecutrix and his both mobiles numbers were switched off. As per the

prosecutrix, the petitioner on the pretext of marrying her, sexually exploited

her. Upon the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, police registered a

case and the investigation ensued. The prosecutrix was medically

examined. Police prepared the spot map and also recorded the statements

of the witnesses. In order to evade his arrest, the petitioner absconded and

on 19.10.2019 he was arrested. Police lifted the scientific samples for

examination and the report is awaited. As per the police, investigation is

27/11/2019 20:25:18 :::HCHP
3

complete and soon challan will be presented in the learned Trial Court.

Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed,

as the petitioner has committed a heinous offence. In case the petitioner is

.

enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution

evidence and may also flee from justice, as he is resident of Uttar Pradesh,

so the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned

Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record,

including the police report, carefully.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the

petitioner is trying to impress upon his parents, so that they agree for his

marriage with the prosecutrix and in fact this case is registered by the

prosecutrix due to some misunderstanding. He has further argued that the

petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence

nor in a position to flee from justice. He has argued that no fruitful

purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an

unlimited period, so the petition may be allowed and the petitioner be

enlarged on bail. Conversely, learned Additional Advocate General has

argued that the petitioner has committed a heinous crime and in case he is

enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may

also flee from justice, as he is resident of Uttar Pradesh, so it is prayed that

the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

27/11/2019 20:25:18 :::HCHP
4

6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued

that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period,

especially when investigation is complete and challan is likely to be

.

presented in the learned Trial Court soon. Nothing is to be recovered from

the petitioner and his custody is not at all required by the police, so the

application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail.

7. At this stage, considering the manner in which the offence is

alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, the fact that the

investigation is complete and the challan will be presented in the Court

soon, custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police,

considering the fact that the petitioner is willing to impress upon his

parents so that they agree for his marriage with the prosecutrix, the

petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence

nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the overall material, which

has come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, the

petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail,

in case so granted, and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept

behind the bars for an unlimited period, so this Court finds that the present

is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is

required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed

and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in

case FIR No. 170 of 2019, dated 20.09.2019, under Sections 376 IPC, Police

27/11/2019 20:25:18 :::HCHP
5

Station Kala Amb, Sirmour, District Nahan, H.P., shall be released on bail

forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of

`25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with one surety in the like amount

.

to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to

the following conditions:

(i) That the petitioner will appear before the
learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and
when required.

(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without
prior permission of the Court.

(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.

(iv) That the petitioner will not tamper with the
prosecution evidence in any manner

whatsoever and if the bail petitioner tries to
misconduct or to tamper with the prosecution
evidence, the bail granted to the petitioner
shall be liable to be rejected.

8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

Copy dasti.

(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
27th November, 2019 Judge
(virender)

27/11/2019 20:25:18 :::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