Office Mangla vs And R
2022 Latest Caselaw 3380 HP

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                         ON THE 13th DAY OF MAY, 2022
                                   BEFORE
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA
                 CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) NO.878 OF 2022




                                                                                                       .

               Between:-

                 MANEESH SON OF SHRI JAI CHAND, AGED ABOUT 18
                 YEARS, RESIDENT OF DEHRA, MOHALLA AND POST





                 OFFICE MANGLA, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.
                 THROUGH HIS FATHER SH. JAI CHAND SON OF SH.
                 PRAKASH CHAND, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

                                                                                       ...PETITIONER





                 (BY MR. KUL BHUSHAN KHAJURIA, ADVOCATE)

                 AND                  r
                 STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
                                                                                       ...RESPONDENT

                 (BY MR. SHIV PAL MANHANS, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL,
                 MR. YUDHBIR SINGH THAKUR AND MR. BHUPINDER
                 SINGH THAKUR, DEPUTY ADVOCATES GENERAL)


                 (ASI KULDEEP SINGH, POLICE STATION SADAR, CHAMBA,
                 ALONGWITH RECORDS)

                 1
                     WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? Yes.




                This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
    Chander Bhusan Barowalia, passed the following :





                                                            ORDER

The present bail application has been maintained by the

petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

seeking his release in case FIR No.114 of 2022 dated 3.4.2022, under

Sections 376, 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the

Protection from Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012, registered at

Police Station Sadar, District Chamba, H.P.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes.

2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner

is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is

permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper

.

with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No

fruitful purpose will be served by sending him behind the bars for an

unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story,

on 3.4.2022, victim/prosecutrix informed the police that she became

friend of the petitioner in September, 2021 and the petitioner started

talking to her on her mother's cellphone. He used to meet her in the

forest area beside her house. On the pretext of marriage, the

petitioner committed sexual intercourse with her on several occasions

without her consent. During the course of investigation, the victim

was medically examined and her MLC was procured. Thereafter,

statement of the victim, under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C was recorded

in the learned Court below. Lastly, it is prayed that the instant bail

application may be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a

serious offence and in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he

may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from

justice, so it is prayed that the instant bail petition may be dismissed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through

the records, including the police report, carefully.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the

petitioner is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position

to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from

justice. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by

sending him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the custody of

the petitioner is not at all required by the police for any purpose. It

has been argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for

.

an unlimited period, so the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by

allowing the instant bail petition.

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General

has argued that the petitioner has committed a serious crime and in

case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the

prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed

that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

7. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has

argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, neither

in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to tamper with the

prosecution evidence. It has been argued that the petitioner cannot

be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the petitioner may

be enlarged on bail by allowing the instant petition.

8. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, also

considering the facts that the petitioner is permanent resident of the

place, neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence

nor in a position to flee from justice, the investigation is complete, so

the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police for any

purpose, also considering the facts that the petitioner cannot be kept

behind the bars for an unlimited period, the petitioner is ready and

willing to abide by the terms and conditions of the bail, in case he is

enlarged on bail and also considering the overall facts, which have

come on record and without elaborately discussing the same at this

stage, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial

discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, is required to be exercised in

his favour. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and it is ordered

that the petitioner, in case FIR No.114 of 2022 dated 3.4.2022, under

.

Sections 376, 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the

Protection from Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012, registered at

Police Station Sadar, District Chamba , be forthwith released on bail on

his furnishing personal bond to the tune of `50,000/- (rupees fifty

thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of

the trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:

                        i.     That the petitioner will appear before
                               the        learned          Trial
                       r       Court/police/authorities as and when
                               required.

                        ii.    That the petitioner will not leave
                               India without prior permission of
                               the Court.

iii. That the petitioner will 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/her from

disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or Court.

9. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

10. Needless to say that the observations made hereinabove

are only confined for adjudication of the present case and the same

shall have no bearing on the merits of the main case, which shall be

adjudicated on its own.

Copy dasti.

( Chander Bhusan Barowalia ) Judge

13th May, 2022 (CS)