The Single Bench of High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla consisting of Justice Satyen Vaidya while granting bail to the petitioner opined that no fruitful purpose shall be served by allowing the petitioner to be kept in custody especially when his custodial interrogation is not warranted.

Facts and Contentions Made

The victim submitted a complaint under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code to the police alleging that the petitioner had been maintaining physical relations with her for last about four years on the pretext of marrying her. As per version of the victim herself, the marriage was solemnized by the petitioner with her on 23rd November 2021 at Talogi temple. However, she alleged that marriage so solemnized by the petitioner with her was mere pretence and thereafter he has not joined the company of the victim.

By way of instant petition, petitioner has approached this Court for grant of bail u/s 438 CrPC on the ground that he is not involved in any offence and his implication is false. It is stated that the victim herself has admitted that she had solemnized marriage with the petitioner. Even after the registration of FIR, a compromise has been effected between the petitioner and the victim on 08.12.2021. The investigation in the case is complete and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. In case the petitioner is arrested in pursuance to aforesaid FIR, his career will be seriously prejudiced. Petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation. He has further undertaken to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed.

Observations of the Court

The Bench observed that:

“The investigation of the case is stated to be complete. The petitioner has already been associated in the investigation and there is no allegation that he avoided his association at any point of time. The allegations as levelled by the victim against the petitioner are to be proved after the trial of the case. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, no fruitful purpose shall be served by allowing the petitioner to be kept in custody especially when his custodial interrogation is not warranted.”

Judgment

The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting Police Officer. The bail was subject to the following conditions:

  • Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. He shall associate himself in the investigation of the case as and when called upon by the I.O.
  • Petitioner shall regularly ensure his presence before the trial Court on each hearing of the trial till its conclusion except in cases of extreme urgency.
  • Petitioner shall not leave the country without express leave of the trial Court and thereafter till the completion of trial.
  • Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.

Case Name: Shashank Thakur vs The State of Himachal Pradesh

Citation: Criminal Misc. Petition Main No. 2460 of 2021

Bench: Justice Satyen Vaidya

Decided on: 31st December 2021

Picture Source :

 
Ayesha