Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 210 (HP)

SURINDER SINGH v. STATE OF H. P.

2000-08-03

M.R.VERMA

body2000
JUDGMENT (M.R. Verma, J.)(Oral): The accused-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the accused) has moved this application for his release on bail in case FIR No. 39/2000 dated 7.3.2000 under Section 302, 201 and 34IPC registered at Police Station, Nalagarh. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General for the State and have also gone through the police report and the investigation records. 3. On 6.3.2000, one Ram Assri (since deceased alongwith one of the accused in the case, namely, Shiksha Kumari went to cut grass beyond Sarsa river. Shiksha Kumari returned home around 2.30 P.M., but Ram Asri, who was the president of the Mahila Mandal did not come back home. The matter was reported about her missing at Police Station, Nalagarh on 7.3.200. The search for the deceased led to the discovery of her dead body. On post mortem examination, the cause of her death was multiple chop wounds in the neck and cutting of the spinal cord by such wounds in the neck leading to hemorrhage shock. The weapon used is opined to be sharp edged with fairly heavy weight. During the course of investigation, on the statement made by Shiksha Kumari, the police arrested two persons who were found innocent. Then she named one Himmat Giri and the accused as the culprits. Himmat Giri was arrested in Mysore and when he was brought to Nalagarh he died on the way. The accused is stated to have gone to Dungarpur in Rajasthan to learn to operate JCB machine. When he was named as an accused in the case by Shiksha Kumari, his family members had contacted him there. Therefore, he returned back to Nalagarh and reported to the police on 22.3.2000. On further investigation, after associating the accused in the investigation, the police arrested him on 27.3.2000 on the basis of disclosure made by Shiksha Kumari and before his death by Himmat Giri, to S.I. Brij Mohan that the accused was involved alongwith him in the murder of said Ram Asri. Thereafter, on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused, the weapon of offence had been recovered from the place of occurrence. Thereafter, on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused, the weapon of offence had been recovered from the place of occurrence. Thus, the evidence against the accused is the disclosure made by accused Shiksha Kumari, deceased Himmat Giri, another accused in the case and his disclosure statement leading to the recovery of the weapon of offence i.e. an axe. 4. The charge sheet against the accused has already been submitted, but the charge has not yet been framed. In this situation, I will refrain from commenting on the value of the evidence collected by the investigating agency against the accused. However, for the purpose of disposal of this application, it may be pointed out that the blood group of the deceased as per the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is AB whereas the blood stains on the alleged weapon of offence are of group B prima-facie not connecting the axe with the commission of the murder. Therefore, the nature of offence on the basis of which a change is sought to be sustained against the accused for the commission of murder, is such which should not deter this Court from directing the release of the accused on bail, unless there is any other legal impediment. 5. The material legal impediments in granting bail to an accused person can be the apprehensions that if released on bail, the accused may tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or abscond with a view to evade the trial and thereby frustrate the ends of justice. In this case, the accused is not shown to have such social or economic status by virtue of which he may influence the prosecution witnesses and win them over. Thus, there is no likelihood of his tampering with the prosecution evidence. Further, there is no likelihood of his absconding with a view to evade the trial, as is apparent from the conduct of accused, inasmuch as when he learnt at Dungarpur that he was named as an accused in a case of murder, he returned back and reported to the police. Thus, there is no legal impediment in directing the release of accused on bail. 6. In view of the above discussion and conclusions, this application is allowed and the accused is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. Thus, there is no legal impediment in directing the release of accused on bail. 6. In view of the above discussion and conclusions, this application is allowed and the accused is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh or in his absence to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan. 7. Be it stated that the observations made hereinabove are strictly for the purpose of disposal of this application and nothing therein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits and de-merits of the case of the prosecution. Application allowed