Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1381 (HP)

Anil Kumar v. State of H. P.

2016-07-14

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2016
JUDGMENT : Dharam Cand Chaudhary, J. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered against him under Sections 323, 324, 326, 307 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, in Police Station, Pachhad, District Sirmaur, H.P. vide FIR No.76/15 on the basis of a complaint made by Shri Sanjay Bahadur, son of the prosecutrix. 2. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in this case on 21.9.2015 and is presently in judicial custody. The investigation in this case is complete. Challan has also been filed. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh has committed the case to the Court of Sessions and the same is now listed for consideration of charge on 16.7.2016. The victim is a Nepali National and residing, for the last 6-7 years with her son Sanjay Bahadur, the complainant at Village Dasana, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur, H.P. She along with her son, the complainant, is managing all agricultural and household affairs of one Raman Singh, resident of the same village. 3. The record reveals that on 6.9.2015, she went to Forest along with her son, the complainant, for bringing fodder for the cattle of Raman Singh, their master. When they were at different locations and the prosecutrix collecting fodder by lopping the branches of =chhinar' tree, the accused-petitioner, whose age has been disclosed by her in between 18-22 years, appeared there and asked for Bidi from her. She entertained his request and having climbed on the tree, threw her bundle of bidi and lighter down. The accused lit bidi and started smoking. In the meanwhile, she also came down from the tree and while coming down the accused-petitioner allegedly raised his hand and wanted her to place foot thereon and to come down. However, she did not agree and told him that she does not want any support from him. 4. When came down, the prosecutrix inquired from the accused as to why he had come there. His reply was that he is going to village Runjha and requested her to show him path leading to the said village. On this, she told him that why he had come there and that the place from where the path leads to village Runjha is far away from here. On this the accused told her that he came there on hearing voice of girl (lady). On this, she told him that why he had come there and that the place from where the path leads to village Runjha is far away from here. On this the accused told her that he came there on hearing voice of girl (lady). He asked for her drat (sickle) and virtually snatched the same from her and thrown away at a distance. It is thereafter he started misbehaving with her and also asked for sexual favour. When she objected to it, he gagged her mouth and made her to lie down forcibly. He picked-up the drat lying nearby and inflicted many blows on her forehead and other parts of body. On account of that she fell unconscious and when returned in her senses found that the accused-petitioner had fled away from that place and the thumb and finger of her right hand cut. 5. The matter was reported to the police by her son Sanjay Bahadur, the complainant. The applications for grant of bail having been filed twice were dismissed by learned Sessions judge and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan vide orders annexed to this petition 6. The orders passed by learned Sessions Judge on 14.12.2015 reveals that the application was dismissed with the observations that the investigation is still in progress and the prayer of the accused for the grant of bail can be considered after the investigation is complete. Now vide order dated 31.3.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, the application has been dismissed on the grounds that the accused-petitioner may influence the prosecution witnesses or may commit similar type of offence. 7. The accused-petitioner is 22 years of age. He belongs to village Puning, under Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra. According to learned counsel, he is a labourer and doing the work of cutting, conversion and sawing of trees. He was working as such in the areas around District Sirmaur at the relevant time. There is no past criminal history in his credit to make this Court to believe that he may commit similar offence if admitted on bail. 8. Though it may not be proper to make any observations touching the merits of the case, however, suffice would it to say that in view of the investigation conducted in the case, further detention of the accused-petitioner is not warranted. 8. Though it may not be proper to make any observations touching the merits of the case, however, suffice would it to say that in view of the investigation conducted in the case, further detention of the accused-petitioner is not warranted. No doubt, thumb and finger of the right hand of the prosecutrix were allegedly found to have been cut and the cut pieces were recovered by the police, however, she did not return to senses even when the accused had chopped her thumb and finger; it is difficult to believe so at this stage when she fell unconscious, the accused may have subjected her to sexual intercourse. The prosecution may produce evidence to prove its case in this regard; however, the accused petitioner is not required to be detained any further in custody. The prosecution witnesses are none-else but the prosecutrix, her son the complainant, and Ram Lal, who informed the complainant that his mother was lying unconscious. The accused petitioner, who belongs to District Kangra, cannot be believed to be so influential so as to win over the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the prosecution case, if admitted on bail. Challan against him has already been filed. The trial is at the stage of consideration of charge. He may not abscond or flee away from justice, suitable conditions can be imposed upon him so that his presence can be ensured during the course of trial also. 9. In view of the above, this petition succeeds and the same is accordingly allowed. Consequently, it is ordered that the accused-petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.76/15, Police Station, Pachhad and presently confined in judicial custody, shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court and shall further abide by the following conditions:- That he shall; a. 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. keep on visiting Police Station, Pachhad, District Sirmaur periodically, i.e. once in two months and shall keep on informing the Station House Officer, about his whereabouts till the statements of material prosecution witnesses are recorded. c. not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; d. not 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; e. not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 10. 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. 11. 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.