Mehar Chand vs State Of H.P
2021 Latest Caselaw 2104 HP

                                                                             .
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA





                                        Cr.MP(M) Nos. 315 and 316 of 2021
                                        Date of Decision 16th March, 2021





    ________________________________________________________

    Cr.MP(M) No. 315 of 2021
    Mehar Chand                                                          ...Petitioner





                                                   Versus

    State of H.P.                                                        ....Respondent
    Cr.MP(M) No. 316 of 2021
    Bali Ram
                          r                                              ...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(s): Mr. Onkar Jairath Advocate along with Mr. Shubham Sood, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s): Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Deputy Advocate General.

HC Balbir Singh No. 5, Police Station Nadaun, is present in person.

__________________________________________________________________

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

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Since both petitions arise out of the same FIR, the

.

same are consolidated and disposed of together in order to avoid

repetition and for the sake of convenience.

2. Present petitions have been filed under Section 438

Cr.P.C. seeking bail in case FIR No. 168 of 2020, dated

05.11.2020 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and

120-B IPC in Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur.

3 Status reports stand filed wherein it is stated that

after releasing the petitioners on anticipatory bail, they have

joined the investigation and they have been interrogated and

specimen hand writing/signatures of petitioner Mehar Chand

have also been obtained for comparison and have been sent

along with questioned documents to State Forensic Science

Laboratory. It is further submitted by Officer present in Court that

custodial interrogation of petitioners is not warranted at this

stage. It is also stated that Bali Ram petitioner is 80% visually

disabled person and his mental health is also not good and

therefore, his specimen hand writing could not be taken,

however, his disability certificate has been placed on record

during investigation by police.

4 In view of above, I do not find that any fruitful

purpose shall be served by rejecting the bail applications filed by

.

petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released

on bail, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the trial Court within two weeks from today,

subject to the following conditions:-

(i) That the petitioners shall make themselves available during investigation as well as the trial on each and every date as and when

required;

(ii) That the petitioners shall 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 from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police

officer or tamper with the evidence. They shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence

or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;

(ii) That petitioners shall not obstruct the smooth

progress of the investigation as well as trial;

(iii) That petitioners shall not jump over the bail and shall inform, in writing, regarding change of address, land line number and/or mobile number, if any, in advance, to concerned Police Station.

(v) That the petitioners shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which they are accused or suspected or the commission of

.

which they are suspected.

(vi) That petitioners shall not misuse their liberty in any manner.

5. It will be open to the prosecution to apply for

imposing any such other or further condition on the petitioners

as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case

and in the interest of justice. It will also be open to the trial

Court to impose any other or further condition on the petitioners

as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice.

6. In case the petitioners violate any condition imposed

upon them, their bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such

eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of

law for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the

directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.

HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.3.2013.

8 Any observation made in this order shall not affect

the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the

disposal of this bail application filed under Section 438 of Code

of Criminal Procedure 1973.

9. The petitioners are permitted to produce copy of

.

order downloaded from the High Court website and the trial

Court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however,

they may verify the order from the High Court website or

otherwise.

Petitions stand disposed of.

Dasti copy on usual terms.

    March 16, 2021
                    r                    (Vivek Singh Thakur)

    (ms)                                        Judge