Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 590 (HP)

MITTER DEV v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014-05-17

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2014
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the status report and Investigating Officer, ASI Amar Singh of Police Station, Karsog, District Mandi has produced the record. 2. Heard. 3. Petitioner is an accused in FIR No.46 of 2014 registered against him under Sections 23 and 26 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and Section 11(i) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Police Station Karsog, District Mandi. 4. The allegations against the accused as disclosed from the record, in a nutshell, are that one minor girl was brought by Smt. Hem Lata wife of accused-petitioner to her house situated at Karsog for cleaning utensils etc. with the assurance that she will be admitted in the school and the educational expenses will be borne by her and that she will also be paid a sum of Rs.1500/- per month. The girl, however, came in the contact of the members of a Non-Governmental Organization, namely "Childline" Mandi on 17.4.2014. She was brought to Mandi and made to produce there before Child Welfare Committee. She made a statement before the Committee that neither she was admitted in any school nor paid anything to her ever since she was taken by the wife of the accused to their house at Karsog and to the contrary the accused-petitioner, her husband besides behaving in an obscene manner tried to make physical contacts with her. The Child Welfare Committee in turn lodged the report with the police of Police Station, Karsog, which has led in registration of the aforesaid FIR against the accused-petitioner. 5. It is seen that an offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months whereas an offence under Section 26 with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years. Similarly, an offence under Section 11(i) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years. 6. The accused-petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with the case registered against him. No doubt, the alleged offence is against a minor girl aged 15 years. Similarly, an offence under Section 11(i) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years. 6. The accused-petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with the case registered against him. No doubt, the alleged offence is against a minor girl aged 15 years. An inhumane treatment seems to have been meted out to the child by the accused-petitioner, however, keeping in view the fact that he is permanent resident of Karsog, District Mandi and there being no complaint that he was not available for the purpose of interrogation as and when called upon to do so and also that the investigation is almost complete, I find the present not a case where well before holding trial against him, he should be confined in custody, particularly, when his custodial interrogation is not required. No doubt, one more case under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code has also been registered against the accused-petitioner vide FIR No.176 of 2009. The same, however, cannot be an impediment in his way in the matter of grant of bail because that was a case on altogether different facts and different in nature. Moreover, his movements can be restricted by imposing suitable conditions while admitting him on bail. 7. Therefore, having regard to the given facts and circumstances this application is allowed. Consequently, it is ordered that in the event of the arrest of the accused-petitioner in connection with the case aforesaid, he shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Police Officer/Investigating Officer and shall abide by further conditions that: He shall: (a) make himself available for the purpose of interrogation as and when required and shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation in a manner so as to take it to its logical end; (b) not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (c) not make any inducement, threat or promises 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; (d) not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 8. 8. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses the 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. 9. The observations made herein above shall not be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case and shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition alone. The application stands accordingly disposed of.