Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 318 (HP)

Balwinder Singh v. State of H. P.

2015-04-08

P.S.RANA

body2015
JUDGMENT : P.S. Rana, Judge. Present bail application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of bail in connection with case FIR No. 180 of 2014 dated 27.9.2014 registered under Sections 457, 380 of Indian Penal Code at P.S. Jawalamukhi District Kangra (HP). 2. It is pleaded that petitioner is innocent and petitioner did not commit any criminal offence as alleged by prosecution. It is pleaded that there is no direct evidence against the petitioner and further pleaded that investigation of case is completed and nothing is required to be recovered from petitioner. It is pleaded that petitioner will cooperate with Investigating Agency and will not hamper the investigation of case. It is pleaded that petitioner undertakes that petitioner will not threat or promise to any witness acquainted with facts of case. It is pleaded that petitioner will abide by all conditions imposed by Court. It is further pleaded that petitioner is in the age of 19 years and is a student. Prayer for acceptance of bail application sought. 3. Per contra police report filed. As per police report FIR No. 180 of 2014 dated 27.9.2014 was registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC in P.S. Jawalamukhi District Kangra (H.P.) against five accused. There is recital in police report that complainant Prem Chand Dhiman, Branch Manager PNB Kaloha Tehsil Rakkar P.S. Jawalamukhi District Kangra (H.P.) is posted in the bank since one month. There is recital in police report that on dated 26.9.2014 bank was closed and ATM was closed at 6.45 PM and on dated 27.9.2014 it was observed that ATM of Kaloha bank was broken. There is further recital in police report that there was cash to the tune of Rs. 6,24,200/- (Rupees six lac twenty four thousand and two hundred only) in ATM machine. There is recital in police report that investigation was conducted and site plan was prepared and photographs also obtained. There is also recital in police report that there was spray upon CCTV cameras and during inquiry accused persons have given extra judicial confession of breaking the ATM of PNB bank and also confessed about stealing of cash amount. There is recital in police report that statement of co-accused Jatinder Singh was recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act and broken locks of shutter were also recovered from bushes. There is recital in police report that statement of co-accused Jatinder Singh was recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act and broken locks of shutter were also recovered from bushes. There is recital in police report that one CD and statement of bank dated 26.9.2014 and transaction statement obtained. There is further recital in police report that cash statement kept in ATM also obtained and took into possession vide seizure memo. There is also recital in police report that spray found upon CCTV camera and bottle of spray recovered as per disclosure statement given by accused tallied with each other as per chemical analyst report. There is further recital in police report that criminal challan filed in Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Court No. 2, Dehra District Kangra (H.P.) There is further recital in police report that all accused persons are quarrelsome persons and they would commit the similar offence if they are released on bail. Prayer for rejection of bail application sought. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the non-petitioner and also perused the record. 5. Following points arise for determination in this bail application:- 1. Whether bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of bail application? 2. Final Order. Findings on Point No.1 6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is innocent and petitioner did not commit any criminal offence cannot be decided at this stage. Same fact will be decided when case shall be disposed of on merits after giving due opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence in support of their case. 7. Another submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that investigation is complete and challan already stood filed in the competent Court of law and on this ground bail application be allowed is accepted for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. At the time of granting bail following factors are considered. (i) Nature and seriousness of offence (ii) The character of the evidence (iii) Circumstances which are peculiar to the accused (iv) Possibility of the presence of the accused at the trial or investigation (v) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with (vi) The larger interests of the public or the State. (i) Nature and seriousness of offence (ii) The character of the evidence (iii) Circumstances which are peculiar to the accused (iv) Possibility of the presence of the accused at the trial or investigation (v) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with (vi) The larger interests of the public or the State. See AIR 1978 SC 179 titled Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State (Delhi Administration). Also see AIR 1962 SC 253 titled The State Vs. Captain Jagjit Singh. It was held in case reported in 2012 Cri. L.J. 702 Apex Court DB 702, titled Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial. It was held that grant of bail is the rule and committal to jail is exceptional. It was held that refusal of bail is a restriction on personal liberty of individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. It was further held that accused should not be kept in jail for an indefinite period. 8. In present case investigation is already completed and challan already stood filed in competent Court of law and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. It is well settled law that accused is presumed to be innocent till convicted by Court of law. Court is of the opinion that it would not be expedient in the ends of justice to keep the petitioner in judicial custody because trial of case will be concluded in due course of time. Court is also of the opinion that if petitioner is released on bail at this stage then interest of State and general public will not be adversely effected because investigation already stood completed in present case and challan also stood filed in the Court. 9. Submission of learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioner that if bail is granted to petitioner then petitioner will induce, threat and influence the prosecution witnesses and on this ground bail application be declined is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. Court is of the opinion that conditional bail will be granted to the petitioner and condition will be imposed in the bail order to the effect that petitioner will not induce and threat the prosecution witnesses. Court is of the opinion that conditional bail will be granted to the petitioner and condition will be imposed in the bail order to the effect that petitioner will not induce and threat the prosecution witnesses. Court is of the opinion that if petitioner will flout the terms and conditions of bail order then non-petitioner will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail strictly in accordance with law. It is well settled law that accused is presumed to be innocent until convicted by competent Court of law. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in affirmative. Point No.2 Final Order 10. In view of findings on point No.1 bail application filed by petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 1 lac with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court on following terms and conditions. (i) That the petitioner will attend the proceedings of trial Court regularly as and when called upon to do so. (ii) That petitioner will 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 will not leave India without the prior permission of the Court. (iv) That petitioner will not commit similar offence qua which he is accused. (v) That petitioner will give his latest residential address in written manner to the Court at which address the petitioner would be available at short notice. Observations made in this order will not effect the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the disposal of this bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. All pending application(s) if any also disposed of. Bail petition filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure stands disposed of.