Between vs State Of Himachal Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4610 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

ON THE 20th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

.

BEFORE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.1653 OF 2021

Between:-

AMANPREET SINGH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

S/O SH. JEEWAN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE NABHA SAHIB, P.O. DIALPURA, TEHSIL DERRA BASI, DISTRICT SAS NAGAR, MOHALI, PUNJAB

.....PETITIONER (BY S/SH.AJAY SIPAHIYA AND AMIT SHARMA, ADVOCATES)

AND

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ...RESPONDENT (BY SH.ANIL JASWAL, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)

(SUB INSPECTOR YADAV CHAND, POLICE STATION PARWANOO,

DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P., PRESENT IN PERSON ON 16.09.2021)

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.1654 OF 2021

Between:-

    MANDEEP SINGH
    AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
    S/O SH. JAGTAR SINGH,
    R/O V.P.O. BANUR,
    TEHSIL & DISTRICT SAS       NAGAR
                                                           .....PETITIONER
    MOHALI, PUNJAB.
    (BY S/SH.AJAY SIPAHIYA AND AMIT
    SHARMA, ADVOCATES)
    AND
    STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
    (BY SH.ANIL JASWAL,   ADDITIONAL                      ...RESPONDENT
    ADVOCATE GENERAL)









    (SUB INSPECTOR YADAV CHAND,
    POLICE    STATION     PARWANOO,
    DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P., PRESENT IN
    PERSON ON 16.09.2021)




                                                         .

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.1655 OF 2021 Between:-

    GURMIT SINGH





    AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
    S/O SH. HARBANS SINGH,
    R/O V.P.O. BANUR,
    TEHSIL & DISTRICT SAS       NAGAR
                                                           .....PETITIONER
    MOHALI, PUNJAB.





    (BY S/SH.AJAY SIPAHIYA AND AMIT
    SHARMA, ADVOCATES)
    AND
    STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

    (BY SH.ANIL JASWAL,   ADDITIONAL                      ...RESPONDENT

    ADVOCATE GENERAL)

    (SUB INSPECTOR YADAV CHAND,
    POLICE    STATION     PARWANOO,
    DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P PRESENT IN


    PERSON ON 16.09.2021)

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.1656 OF 2021

Between:-

PRADEEP SINGH

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, S/O SH. HARNEK SINGH, R/O VILLAGE NADIALI, P.O. BANUR, TEHSIL & DISTRICT SAS NAGAR

MOHALI, PUNJAB.

.....PETITIONER (BY S/SH.AJAY SIPAHIYA AND AMIT SHARMA, ADVOCATES) AND STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH (BY SH.ANIL JASWAL, ADDITIONAL ...RESPONDENT ADVOCATE GENERAL)

(SUB INSPECTOR YADAV CHAND, POLICE STATION PARWANOO, DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P., PRESENT IN PERSON ON 16.09.2021)

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.1658 OF 2021 Between:-

SUKHWINDER SINGH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

.

    S/O SH. GURNAM SINGH,





    R/O V.P.O. BANUR,
    TEHSIL & DISTRICT SAS          NAGAR
                                                              .....PETITIONER
    MOHALI, PUNJAB.
    (BY S/SH.AJAY SIPAHIYA AND AMIT





    SHARMA, ADVOCATES)
    AND
    STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
    (BY SH.ANIL JASWAL,      ADDITIONAL                      ...RESPONDENT





    ADVOCATE GENERAL)

    (SUB INSPECTOR YADAV CHAND,
    POLICE    STATION     PARWANOO,
    DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P., PRESENT IN

    PERSON ON 16.09.2021)

    Whether approved for reporting?

These petitions coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:

JUDGMEMT

These bail petitions being decided by this common

judgment as common question of facts and law are involved in

these petitions are to be adjudicated in these petitions.

2. Petitioners have approached this Court by invoking

provisions of Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure (in short

'Cr.P.C.'), seeking regular bail in case FIR No.60 of 2021, dated

25.07.2021, registered in Police Station Parwanoo, District Solan,

H.P., under Sections 489B and 489C read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').

3. Status reports stand filed and record was also

produced on 16.09.2021.

4. As per prosecution case, on 25.07.2021 complainant

.

Sukhdev Sharma working as a Manager in Chandel Filling Station

Koti, District Solan, H.P., had submitted a complaint stating

therein that on that day, at about 7.30 p.m. driver of a Accent

Car No.CH03K-4066, with five occupants therein, had filled

petrol in their car for `1130/- and for payment thereof, driver of

the car had handed over two notes of `500/- each, one `100/-

note, one `20/- note and one `10/- note. The moment salesman

Sudama checked the notes, he found that both notes of `500/-

were having one and the same number SMM337518 and

realizing that these notes were fake, salesman had shouted for

stopping the car, but the driver had fled from the spot by driving

his vehicle towards Pinjore-Parwanoo. The salesman had

narrated the incident to complainant immediately, whereupon

complainant informed Police Station Parwanoo telephonically and

tried to chase the vehicle on motorcycle. For heavy traffic on the

National Highway NH 05, police had stopped the car of

petitioner-accused at TTR bye-pass Parwanoo and persons sitting

in the car had disclosed their names as Gurmit Singh, Mandeep

Singh, Sukhwinder Singh, Amanpreet and Pradeep Singh.

5. On the basis of complainant, FIR was registered and

petitioners were interrogated and arrested for commission of

offences under Sections 489B and 489C read with Section 34 IPC.

As per prosecution case, during jamatalashi of Mandeep two

notes of denomination of `200/- having the same serial number

5EU250252 were also recovered.

6. It is stated in the status reports that during

.

interrogation, it was disclosed by Mandeep Singh, who was

driving the car that he was earning his livelihood by doing work

of hoarding and wallpaper affixation and he had received notes

from some unknown person against payment for work done by

him and he had tried to circulate these notes in Punjab, but he

did not succeed and he had come to Himachal Pradesh as a

tourist alongwith his companions on 25.07.2021 and after filling

petrol from the Petrol Pump, he had made payment with two

notes of `500/- each alongwith other notes and when salesman

was counting the notes he drove his vehicle towards Chandigarh

for fleeing from the spot. According to prosecution case,

Mandeep and his companions did not stop the vehicle despite

hearing calls of the salesman and all persons were knowing

about the fake currency paid to the salesman at the Petrol Pump.

7. It is also stated in the status reports, that on

26.07.2021 petitioners were remanded to the police custody for

two days and thereafter they were sent in judicial custody on

28.07.2021. During police custody of petitioners-accused, they

were interrogated and house of Mandeep Singh was also raided

and searched on 27.07.2021, but during search nothing

objectionable was found in his house.

8. Petitioners had also approached learned Additional

Sessions Judge-II, Solan, District Solan, H.P., by filing bail

applications for enlarging them on bail, which were dismissed on

21.08.2021.

9. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

.

petitioners that petitioner Mandeep Singh is a poor labourer and

Amanpreet is a student of Bachelor of Computer Applications,

three years Regular Program in SUS College of Research and

Technology, Tangori, Mohali and presently he is in 5th Semester.

Documents to substantiate this plea have also been placed on

record. It has further been stated that petitioners are not

involved in crime covered under Sections 489B and 489C of IPC,

but being a poor man Mandeep was not in a position to throw

away the notes of fake currency received by him against

payment of his labour and, therefore, innocently without

visualizing the effect thereof and realizing seriousness of the

offence, he had tried to circulate these notes in the market and,

therefore, it has been submitted that offence has been

committed by petitioner Mandeep Singh for ignorance. Whereas,

it has been submitted that other petitioners-accused were having

no any knowledge about the nature of currency being possessed

by Mandeep Singh.

10. It has further been stated that from the raid

conducted by the police party in the house of petitioner-accused

Mandeep Singh nothing has been found there which establishes

that it is not a case of hardcore criminals indulged in fabrication

or smuggling of fake currency, but is a case where petitioner

Mandeep had tried to circulate two notes received by him from

someone else and other petitioners, without having such

knowledge, were accompanying him in a tour to Himachal

Pradesh. Therefore, it has been prayed that petitioners may be

.

released on bail, at this stage, and they are ready to furnish

personal bonds as well as local sureties.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

that though for commission of offences under Sections 489B and

489C IPC imprisonment for life has been prescribed, but at the

same time, sentence with imprisonment of either description for

a term which may extend to ten years and/or fine. No minimum

sentence has been provided under these sections.

12. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioners that petitioners have no role in fabricating fake

currency, but whosoever has done this, it appears, that he has

done it by photostating the original notes and further that had it

would have done by petitioners, then they would not have given

both notes with one and the same serial number to one and the

same person, rather would have tried to circulate these notes

separately to different persons.

13. Considering entire material on record but without

assessing it on merit and also considering principles and factors

relevant to be considered at the time of deciding bail

applications with reference to aforesaid facts and circumstances

placed before me, and submissions made by learned counsel for

the petitioners as well as learned Additional Advocate General, I

find that at this stage, petitioners are entitled for bail.

14. Accordingly, petitions are allowed and petitioners are

enlarged on bail in case FIR No.60 of 2021, dated 25.07.2021,

registered in Police Station Parwanoo, District Solan, H.P., on

.

their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of `35,000/- each with

one local surety each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of

the trial Court, within two weeks from today, upon such further

conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court,

including the conditions enumerated hereinafter, so as to ensure

the presence of petitioners/accused at the time of trial and also

subject to following conditions:-

(i) That the petitioners shall make themselves available

to the police or any other Investigating Agency or Court in the present case 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 them 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;

(iii) that the petitioners shall not obstruct the smooth

progress of the investigation/trial;

(iv) that the petitioners shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which they are accused or suspected;

(v) that the petitioners shall not misuse their liberty in any manner;

(vi) that the petitioners shall not jump over the bail;

(vii) that in case petitioners indulge in repetition of similar offence(s) then, their bail shall be liable to be

cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution;

(viii) that the petitioners shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission; and

.

(ix) that the petitioners shall inform the Police/Court

their contact numbers and shall keep on informing about change in addresses and contact numbers, if

any, in future.

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

imposing and/or to the trial Court to impose any other condition

on the petitioners as deemed necessary in the facts and

circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and

thereupon, 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.

16. 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.

17. 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 18.03.2013.

18. Observations made in this petition hereinbefore, shall

not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly

confined for the disposal of the bail application.

19. Petitions are disposed of in aforesaid terms.

20. Petitioners are permitted to produce a copy of this

judgment, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of

Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said

.

authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if

required, may verify it from Website of the High Court.

(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.

    September 20, 2021
          (Purohit)




                         r         to