Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 215 (HP)

NEHA SHARMA v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2013-04-02

SANJAY KAROL

body2013
JUDGMENT SANJAY KAROL, J. 1. In relation to F.I.R. No.28/2013 dated 23.2.2013, under Section 379 I.P.C., registered at Police Station, Dhalli, District Shimla, petitioner was granted interim bail on 7.3.2013. Since then, petitioner has joined investigation. The recovery of article in question i.e. gold has been effected. 2. Mr. P.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main accused Smt. Sunita and Smt. Veena have been released on bail. The Investigating Officer, H.C. Baljeet Singh, Police Station, Dhalli submits that the investigation is complete and the Challan is likely to be filed in the near future. I have perused the status report as also the record produced by the Investigating Officer, H.C. Baljeet Singh, Police Station, Dhalli. Record reveals that petitioner has been fully cooperative during the course of the investigation. 3. In the given facts and circumstances, the petitioner has prima facie made out a case for grant of bail. 4. This Court has taken into account the nature of accusation, the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the material so far collected by the prosecution during investigation. I am of the considered view that there is no apprehension made out by the State that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, she would tamper with the witnesses or extend any threats to the complainant. There is no probability of the petitioner abusing his liberty nor would she interfere or in any manner impede with the course of justice. Petitioner is also not likely to flee from justice. She, through her learned counsel, undertakes to make herself available during the course of investigation, if required, as also during trial, if any. Having taken into consideration the overall attending circumstances, the petitioner has been able to show that there is reason to believe that the threat of arrest is imminent. 5. For all the aforesaid reasons, interim order dated 7.3.2013 is made absolute. The petitioner shall be on bail till such time Challan is presented in the Court for trial where after she shall approach the Court for regular bail, in accordance with law. Needless to add, during this period petitioner shall fully comply with all the statutory conditions laid down under the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. As a matter of abundant caution, it is clarified that petitioner shall neither tamper with the evidence nor try to influence the witnesses. Needless to add, during this period petitioner shall fully comply with all the statutory conditions laid down under the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. As a matter of abundant caution, it is clarified that petitioner shall neither tamper with the evidence nor try to influence the witnesses. She shall make herself available for investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. She shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 6. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above. With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of. Petition stands disposed.