Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 931 (HP)

Raj Kumar v. State of H. P.

2013-11-05

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2013
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral) Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the status report and ASI Sheesh Pal, Police Station, Mcleodganj, District Kangra, the I.O., has produced the record. 2. The accused-petitioner has been booked by the police of Police Station Mcleodganj, District Kangra in a case under Sections 354-A, 323 and 341 IPC vide FIR No.83/13 with the allegation that during the night intervening 14-15.10.2013, around 10.30 PM he prevented the complainant while on her way from cowshed to the house from moving ahead and tried to outrage her modesty. 3. Admittedly, on that day the accused-petitioner was present in the house of the complainant. He had consumed liquor with her husband and it is around 10.30 PM on his way to his home happened to meet the complainant, who had been coming back from the cowshed. He allegedly pressed her breasts and outraged her modesty. She pushed him aside and he fell down. In that process, her nose pin got lost somewhere and she received injuries on her person. When came to house, she narrated the occurrence to her son and husband. The report could not be lodged during that night nor on the next day rather on 16.10.2013. The accused-petitioner has joined the interrogation, therefore, there is no complaint in this behalf. The present is not a case where custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioner is required. The manner in which the occurrence has taken place needs evidence, which the prosecution may produce during the course of trial. Since the accused-petitioner is permanent resident of District Kangra, this Court finds no reason as to why he will not be available to the police for the purpose of further interrogation if required and ultimately at the time of trial. Therefore, this application is allowed. It is ordered that in the event of arrest of the accused-petitioner in this case, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. Therefore, this application is allowed. It is ordered that in the event of arrest of the accused-petitioner in this case, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the I.O./Arresting Police Officer and shall also abide by the following conditions:- a. He shall join the interrogation if required to do so and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; b. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor 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 Investigating Officer; and c. He shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 4. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses his liberty or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him, the investigating agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail. 5. The observations made hereinabove, shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and will have no bearing on the merits of the case.