Kalu Alias Rajinder vs State Of H.P
2021 Latest Caselaw 3603 HP

                                                                             .
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA





                                        Cr.MP(M) No. 1215 of 2021
                                        Date of Decision 5th August, 2021





    ________________________________________________________

    Kalu alias Rajinder                                                  ...Petitioner
                                                   Versus
    State of H.P.                                                        ....Respondent

    Coram


    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Whether approved for reporting?1

______________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Sative Chauhan, Advocate, through Video Conferencing.

For the Respondent: Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Deputy Advocate General, through Video Conferencing.

__________________________________________________________________

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Petitioner has approached this Court under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail, in case FIR No. 31 of 2020,

dated 14.03.2020, registered under Sections 457, 380 IPC at

Police Station Kumarsain, District Shimla HP.

2 Status report stands filed wherein it is stated that in

present case, FIR was registered on the basis of complaint dated

Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

13th March, 2020 wherein complainant had reported the theft of

certain articles including one LED 43" L.G. Mark.

.

3 It is stated in status report that despite making

earnest efforts, police did not find any clue before February, 2021

and on 2nd February, 2021, on the basis of suspicion, petitioner's

house was raided and searched in presence of local Ward Panch

Smt.Sunita Devi and resident Bal Krishan Sharma and during that

search, TV LED LG mark having the same serial number which

was mentioned on Bill No. 257 dated 8.10.2016, reported to be

stolen in FIR, was recovered from there. Other stolen articles

could not be recovered. On the basis of this recovery of stolen

article, petitioner was arrested on 2nd February, 2021. It is further

reported that about 16 other cases of theft have been registered

against petitioner since the year 2006 till 2020, out of which

three cases are of 2020, whereas one case is of 2021.

4 As per status report, petitioner has not disclosed

anything about other stolen articles nor about his companions

involved in commission of offence of theft.

5 Petitioner had approached the Sessions Court for

bail, which has been rejected recently on 14.06.2021. I have

gone through order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Kinnaur at Rampur Bushehr. I do not find any reason to disagree

with reasons recorded for rejecting the bail.

6 Taking into consideration the entire facts and

circumstances placed before me, I find that at this early stage of

.

trial, when evidence of only two witnesses has been recorded

and case is listed for recording of remaining evidence on 16 th

August, 2021, petitioner is not entitled for bail.

Hence, petition is dismissed.

    August 05, 2021                              (Vivek Singh Thakur)
    (ms)            r                                    Judge