Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 930 (HP)

Sushma Dadwal v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2013-11-05

RAJIV SHARMA

body2013
JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Present petition for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case FIR No.140/2013 dated 20.9.2013 for offences under sections 451, 354-B, 324, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Amb. 2. Petitioner claims herself to be innocent. Hence, the present petition. Petitioner had filed Bail Application No. 151-XXII-13 before the Sessions Judge, Una. He dismissed the same on 18.10.2013. 3. Mr. Mohit Thakur submits that co-accused, namely, Anil Kumar, Raksha Devi and Devi Singh have been enlarged on bail by this Court on 30.10.2013. 4. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. It is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with FIR No. 140/13, Police Station, Amb, she shall be released on bail, subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting Police Officer/I.O., and shall further abide by the following conditions:- 1. Petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation as and when required and shall cooperate with the investigating Officer to conduct the investigation in a manner so as to take it to its logical end; 2. Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; 3. Petitioner shall not 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 court or the police officer; and 4. Petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the court. 5. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuse her liberty or violate any of the conditions imposed upon her, the investigating agency shall be free to move this court for cancellation of the bail. 6. The observations hereinabove shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and have no bearing on the merits of the case. All the applications stand disposed of,