Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 339 (HP)

Goverdhan Singh v. State of H. P.

2014-04-03

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2014
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral). Petitioner is an accused in FIR No.161 of 2012, registered against him in Police Station, Shahpur, District Kangra under Sections 498-A & 306 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been arrested in this case on 19.12.2012 and since then he is in judicial custody. 2. The application filed by the accused-petitioner before the trial Court has been dismissed vide order dated 1.2.2014, annexed to this petition only on the ground that there is apprehension of the prosecution witnesses to be influenced and win over by him, in case admitted on bail and also that the offence he committed is serious. 3. Prior to that the accused-petitioner had preferred an application registered Cr.MP (M) No. 11369 of 2013 before this Court also, which was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn with the following observations: “3. The perusal of status report so filed reveals that the co-accused of the accused-petitioner have already been released on bail. The report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. also stands filed and the case after framing of charge is now adjourned to 20th and 21st September, 2013 for recording the prosecution evidence. 4. The allegations of harassment of the deceased prima facie are against the accused-petitioner. The apprehension of learned Additional Advocate General is that in the event of the accused-petitioner is admitted on bail at this stage when the case is fixed for prosecution evidence after about two weeks, he may try to win over the prosecution witnesses and dissuade them from stating the true facts before the Court. In view of this learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw the petition at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty reserved to file afresh after the statements of material prosecution witnesses are recorded. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.” 4. If not shocking, it is painful to note that even after the expiry of about seven months from the date of order ibid passed by this Court in the petition the petitioner previously preferred, even statement of a single witness has not yet been recorded. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.” 4. If not shocking, it is painful to note that even after the expiry of about seven months from the date of order ibid passed by this Court in the petition the petitioner previously preferred, even statement of a single witness has not yet been recorded. This Court refrains itself from making any other and further observation as to whether it happens due to any laxity on the part of the Court seized of the matter or the prosecution, however, suffice would it to say that the accused petitioner, in such a situation, cannot be made to remain any further behind the bar on the mere apprehension that if admitted on bail he may tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to win over the prosecution witnesses, that too when his co-accused stand released on bail and there is no complaint that while on bail they ever tried to win over the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence. Of course, the offence he allegedly committed is serious in nature. Nothing at this stage, however, can be said qua the manner in which he allegedly committed the said offence. He is a local resident of District Kangra. Therefore, it can reasonably be believed that he has roots in the society and will be available at the time of trial. Otherwise also while admitting him on bail appropriate conditions to ensure his presence can be imposed upon him. I therefore, allow this application and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.161/12, Police Station, Shahpur and presently confined in judicial custody, shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge and shall further abide by the following conditions:- That he; a. shall 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. 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; c. shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 5. 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. 6. The observations hereinabove shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and have no bearing on the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of.