Inder Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1364 HP

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.




                                                                       .
                                     Cr.MP(M) No. 341 of 2021





                              Date of decision: February 26, 2021.

    Inder Singh                                      ......Petitioner.





                                Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh                        .....Respondent.

    Coram





    Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1
    For the petitioner          :       Mr. Lovneesh Thakur, Advocate.

    For the respondent
                            r   :       Mr. Amit Dhumal, Dy. AG.

    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge (Oral)

Petitioner is accused of committing an unnatural act

with a cow in FIR No. 16 of 2021 lodged under Section 377 of

Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Dharampur,

District Mandi.

An anticipatory bail petition preferred by the

petitioner before learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mandi was

eventually rejected on 18.2.2021, hence he has moved instant

petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint of

one Yash Pal Singh, who stated that his elder brother had left

their village on 1.2.2021 for some work after assigning the task

of watch and ward of his cow to the complainant. On 3.2.2021

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

the complainant and his wife went to the cow-shed at around

7:15 P.M. After opening the door of the cow-shed, they noticed

.

the petitioner indulging in an unnatural act with the cow. On

seeing the complainant and his wife, the petitioner statedly fled

from the spot. The complainant thereafter informed his brother

about the incident. His brother-Ramesh Kumar reached his home

on 10.2.2021 and called a meeting of 'Gram Samiti'. In the

3.

r to meeting held on 12.2.2021, the petitioner allegedly partially

admitted his mistake.

As per status report, during investigation, the call

detail reports of mobile phones used by petitioner, complainant

Yash Pal and his elder brother Ramesh Kumar were obtained

showing exchange of calls between them, more particularly on

and around the day of alleged incident. Ramesh Kumar has

allegedly also recorded a telephonic conversation in respect of

admission of guilt by the petitioner.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that

petitioner is a respectable person and had remained as Up-

Pradhan of the area in question. During the recently concluded

elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions, he had not supported

Shri Ramesh Kumar-elder brother of the complainant who had

contested the elections. The present FIR is only to harass the

petitioner on that count. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has

also raised the plea of innocence and false implication of the

petitioner. He has further submitted that the petitioner will abide

by all the terms and conditions in case of enlargement on bail.

.

Learned Deputy Advocate General has opposed the

grant of bail by submitting that the petitioner is accused of

serious offence. Alternatively, it is submitted that in case this

Court is inclined bail to the petitioner, then the same be made

subject to stringent conditions.

5.

Status report does not dispute the fact that pursuant

to the interim protection granted by this Court on 22.2.2021, the

petitioner has joined the investigation and is co-operating with

the investigating agency in all respects. The petitioner is a

married man of 65 years of age having grown up children. The

status report does not indicate any sexual perversity on part of

the petitioner. No criminal history of the petitioner has been

reflected in the status report. Rivalry between two groups due to

elections cannot be ruled out at this stage. The alleged incident

is of 3.2.2021 whereas the FIR in question was registered on

12.2.2021. The mode and manner of the petitioner's entering in

the locked cow-shed is also not forthcoming at this stage. There

is no allegation in the status report about petitioner's influencing

the prosecution witnesses or evidence. In view of all attending

facts and circumstances, petitioner has made out a case of

confirmation of the interim protection granted to him vide order

dated 22.2.2021. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to

the petitioner vide order dated 22.2.2021 is confirmed subject to

the following conditions:

.

(i) Petitioner is directed to join the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. He shall fully cooperate the Investigating Officer and will appear before him in the

concerned police station as and when called in accordance with law;

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever:

(iii) Petitioner shall not contact the complainant or his family members in any manner whatsoever. Petitioner shall not contact, threaten or intimidate the victim in any manner whatsoever.

(iv) Petitioner will not leave India without prior

permission of the Court.

(v) Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer;

(vi) In case of launching of prosecution, petitioner shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law.

(vii) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence

during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any.

In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions

of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move

appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is made

clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of

adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as

an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned trial Court shall

decide the matter without being influenced by above

observations.

.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition

stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous

applications, if any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge.

February 26, 2021

(vs)