Kushal Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3612 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                 CRMPM No.: 834 of 2021
                                                 Decided on: 05.08.2021




                                                                     .

     Kushal Kumar                                                ....Petitioner.

                  Versus





     State of Himachal Pradesh                                   ...Respondent.
     Coram
     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
     Whether approved for reporting?1 No





     For the petitioner          :       Mr. Vijay Bir Singh, Advocate.

     For the respondent          :       M/s Sumesh Raj, Adarsh Sharma
                                         and Sanjeev Sood, Addl. Advocate
                  r                      Generals with M/s J.S. Guleria
                                         and Kamal Kant Chandel, Deputy

                                         Advocate General.

                                         (Through Video Conference)
     Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Status report has been filed, which is perused and

taken on record.

2. Heard.

3. On instructions, learned Deputy Advocate

General submits that petitioner has joined the

investigation as and when directed by the Investigating

Officer. Further, as of now, no recovery etc. is to be

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

effected at his instance. However, as per him, grant of

anticipatory bail is not warranted in the facts of the case.

.

4. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties

and also gone through the status report.

5. It is not in dispute that after the grant of bail,

the petitioner has duly participated in the course of

investigation and has not created any hindrance in the

same. It is further not the allegation of the prosecution

that in the interregnum, post grant of anticipatory bail,

the petitioner has either tried to influence any witness or

has created any other impediment in the course of the

investigation.

6. Therefore, keeping into consideration the fact

that the investigation is now complete, this petition is

allowed and order dated 03.05.2021 is made absolute,

however, subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner shall furnish personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court within a period of two weeks from today.

ii) He shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and 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;

iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever.

iv) He shall 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

v) He shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court.

7. It is clarified that findings which have been

returned by this Court while deciding this petition are

only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail

petition and learned trial Court shall not be influenced,

in any manner, whatsoever, by any of the findings so

returned by this Court in the adjudication of this

petition, during the course of trial of the case. It is

further clarified that in case the petitioner does not

complies with the conditions which have been imposed

upon him while granting the present bail, the State shall

be at liberty to approach this Court for the cancellation of

the bail. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Copy dasti.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 05, 2021 (narender