Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1415 (HP)

Mabavir Prasad v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2014-10-10

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2014
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioner has approached this court for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 126 of 2014 registered at Police Station, Bhuntar, District Kullu on 22.8.2014, under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC. 2. The respondents have produced the records and have also filed the status report. It appears that on the basis of a letter written by the Deputy Director, Higher Education, Kullu, District Kullu to the Superintendent of Police, Kullu, the aforesaid FIR came to be registered. The allegations against the petitioner were to the effect that Directorate of Higher Education had conducted a preliminary inquiry against the petitioner, who was a Lecturer in Physics in Govt. Senior Secondary School, Garsa, Distt. Kullu and it was found that he joined as a Lecturer on contract basis on the basis of fake and forged documents and he had also created following fake and forged documents, which were never signed by the Principal, Govt. Senior Secondary School, Bagsaid: 1. Appointment letter EDU.GSSS Bagsaid-Cont.app- 01/272 dated 24.6.02. 2. Appointment letter Edu. GSSS Bagsaid/Contract 2002-03-1097-98 dated 24.6.2002. 3. Termination letter EDN-GSSS-Bag-1320-21- contract-2002 dated 9-12-2002. 4. Entries in the service book. 3. It is claimed that the appointment of petitioner was found to have been made on the basis of fake and forged document and along with this letter the copy of the enquiry report was also enclosed. 4. Pursuant to directions issued from time to time by this court, the petitioner has joined investigation and admittedly no recoveries are required to be made. It is also not a case where custodial interrogation is required for which purpose the presence of the petitioner is required. The complicity of the accused qua the offence can only be established in a regular trial and merely on the basis of accusation the petitioner cannot be sent to custody. 5. The petitioner otherwise is a permanent resident of District Kullu and therefore, presumed to have roots in the society. It is also not disputed by the respondents that he had been joining investigation as and when directed and there is no allegation that he would temper with the investigation or influence or induce the prosecution witnesses. Thus this is a fit case where discretion of bail ought to be exercised in favour of the petitioner. 6. It is also not disputed by the respondents that he had been joining investigation as and when directed and there is no allegation that he would temper with the investigation or influence or induce the prosecution witnesses. Thus this is a fit case where discretion of bail ought to be exercised in favour of the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in case FIR No. 126 of 2014 registered at Police Station, Bhuntar, District Kullu on 22.8.2014, under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC, he shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of any Judicial Magistrate Ist Class stationed at Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. It is clarified that petitioner shall- (i) make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and 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; (ii) not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (iii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and (iv) not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the court. The learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kullu, District Kullu is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013. 7. 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.