Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1388 (HP)

Karma Lama v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2014-10-09

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2014
Judgment Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 56 of 2013 dated 26.10.2013 registered at Police Station, Jhakri, District Shimla, under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Records of the investigation have been made available to the Court and the learned Additional Advocate General has also filed the status report. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records carefully. 4. The story of the prosecution is that on 20.10.2013 during day time the prosecutrix received a call on the cell phone of her mother from some Dinesh and immediately thereafter she left the house and came to Rampur in search of said person. He was traceable despite search made by the prosecutrix at Rampur, Khaneri and Jhakri. On 22.10.2013 the day of ‘Karvachauth’ when she felt thirsty, she approached a tap at Jhakri and on seeing her there, some ladies did not permit her to drink water and directed her to go to nearby deras of Gorkhas. The prosecutrix went there upto the dera of Ravinder where he was alone. It is further story of the prosecution that during night said Ravinder called the petitioner and then they took the prosecutrix in a vehicle towards Nogli where they committed rape. 5. The petitioner had approached this Court earlier on two occasions, but had withdrawn the bail applications. Now this bail application has been filed on the ground that the statement of the prosecutrix and her father have already been recorded and nothing incriminating against the petitioner has come in their testimonies recorded before the Court as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively. The copies of the statements have been annexed alongwith the petition, a perusal whereof prima-facie establishes that no serious allegations against the petitioner for the alleged offence have been made out by the prosecutrix and her father. 6. It is not the case of the prosecutrix that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he would threaten the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. 6. It is not the case of the prosecutrix that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he would threaten the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. Even otherwise, it has been informed by the Investigating Officer that now only the statements of police officials remained to be recorded and there is no reason to believe that these witnesses would be disassociated by the petitioner in the event of his being released on bail. 7. I find this to be a fit case where the discretion of bail ought to be granted to the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner is permanent resident of Village and Post Office Jhakri, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla and presumed to have roots in the Society. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 56 of 2013 dated 26.10.2013 registered at Police Station, Jhakri, District Shimla, under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rampur, District Shimla, H.P. with the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Agency; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, 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 to any police officer; (iii) that the petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or threaten the witnesses; (iv) that the petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court; (v) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner. Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rampur, District Shimla is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC.VIG/Misc. Instructions/93-IV. 7139 dated 18.3.2013. 9. Any observation made hereinabove 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 hereinabove. Petition stands disposed of.