Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 636 (HP)

MUKESH KUMAR v. STATE OF H. P.

2013-07-03

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2013
Judgment : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. - 1. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the police report and Investigating Officer, ASI Shiv Lal of Police Station, Bhawarna, District Kangra has produced the record. 2. Heard. The allegations against the accused-petitioners, in a nutshell, are that they duped complainant, Smt. Veena Devi of village Matt, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra by misrepresenting that they were expert in washing/cleaning ornaments and they would hand over the golden ornaments to her after cleaning/washing in the same condition. She having fell prey to such a representation they made handed over her ornaments to them. They put the same in some chemical and as a result of which the ornaments melted down and the weight thereof reduced drastically. A case on the report lodged by Smt. Veena Devi, aforesaid under Sections 420 and 379 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code has been registered against them in police station, Bhawarna, district Kangra on 4th March, 2013 and since then they are in custody. The applications for grant of bail, they preferred before learned Judicial Magistrate, Palampur and subsequently in the Sessions Court stand dismissed on the ground that there is apprehension of the accused- petitioners to hamper the investigation of the case and tamper with the prosecution evidence as well as fleeing away from justice in case released on bail. Also that their identity and antecedents also remain to be ascertained. 3. Now there is change in the circumstances as the investigation is almost complete and the challan has already been filed in the trial Court. Even supplementary challan has also been prepared and is likely to be presented in the Court very shortly. The liberty of bail if otherwise legally permissible, should not be denied merely that there is likelihood of the offender to hamper the investigation of the case or tamper with the prosecution evidence and for that matter his or her likelihood to flee away from justice, as in the event of grant of bail, the movement of an offender can be restricted by imposing suitable conditions upon him. 4. In the case in hand, no doubt, both accused- petitioners belong to Bihar. Therefore, there is no likelihood of hampering the investigation of the case or tampering with the prosecution evidence being not influential enough to do so. 4. In the case in hand, no doubt, both accused- petitioners belong to Bihar. Therefore, there is no likelihood of hampering the investigation of the case or tampering with the prosecution evidence being not influential enough to do so. The possibility of their fleeing away from justice, if admitted on bail, can otherwise be checked by imposing suitable conditions upon them. I, therefore, accept this application and direct that if the accused-petitioners are not required in any other case, they be released on bail in connection with FIR No.22 of 2013 registered against them under Sections 420 and 379 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code in Police Station Bhawarna, District Kangra subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one local surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palampur on the conditions that they shall: (a) regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; (b) not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; (c) not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court; and (d) keep on visiting Police Station, Bhawarna, district Kangra once in a month and keep on informing the Station House Officer of the Police Station about their addresses so that in the event of their presence is required, the same can be secured. It is clarified that if the petitioners misuse the liberty or violate any of the conditions imposed upon them, the investigating agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail. 5. Any observations made hereinabove shall not be construed to be reflection on the merits of the case and shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition alone. 6. The application is accordingly allowed and stands disposed of.