Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 513 (HP)

Anil Khan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2016-04-20

P.S.RANA

body2016
ORDER : P.S.Rana, J Present petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of bail relating to FIR No. 162 of 2015 dated 26.9.2015 registered under Sections 498A, 306 read with section 34 IPC at Police Station Barmana District Bilaspur HP. 2. It is pleaded that petitioner is innocent and petitioner did not commit any criminal offence as alleged by prosecution. It is further pleaded that any condition imposed by Court will be binding upon petitioner. It is further pleaded that other female co-accused already released on bail and on concept of parity male co-accused be also released on bail. Prayer for acceptance of bail petition sought. 3. Per contra police report filed. Deceased has written a suicide note. Deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of drowning. There is recital in suicide note that accused persons used to harass deceased and also used to beat the deceased and also used to demand dowry from deceased in her matrimonial house. There is recital in police report that husband of deceased intended to marry with Isha Sharma but due to difference of religion between Isha Sharma and Ishan Khan co-accused Isha Sharma refused to marry with co-accused Ishan Khan who is husband of deceased. There is recital in police report that husband of deceased namely Ishan Khan and Isha Sharma used to talk with each other by way of telephone. There is recital in police report that co-accused Ishan Khan husband of deceased used to pressurize deceased for divorce. There is recital in police report that police took into possession two bags, suicide note, post mortem report and also recorded statements of witnesses. There is recital in police report that all accused persons are in judicial custody. There is also recital in police report that as per chemical analyst report SFSL Junga suicide note was written by deceased in her own handwriting. There is recital in police report that investigation is completed and challan stood filed in competent Court of law on 17.12.2015. There is recital in police report that in case petitioner male co-accused is released on bail he will threat the prosecution witnesses and on this ground bail petition be dismissed. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and Court also heard learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioner and also perused record carefully. 5. There is recital in police report that in case petitioner male co-accused is released on bail he will threat the prosecution witnesses and on this ground bail petition be dismissed. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and Court also heard learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioner and also perused record carefully. 5. Following points arise for determination in present bail petition. (1) Whether bail petition filed by male co-accused under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is liable to be accepted as alleged in memorandum of grounds of bail petition relating to criminal offence of abetment of suicide and relating to criminal offence of cruelty to married woman in her matrimonial house?. (2) Final Order. Findings upon point No.1 with reasons. 6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in present case cannot be decided at this stage. Same fact will be decided when case shall be decided on merits by learned trial Court after giving due opportunity of hearing to both parties to lead evidence in support of their case. 7. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner that other female co-accused already released on bail and on the concept of parity petitioner be also released is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. It is well settled law that at the time of granting bail following factors are to be considered such as (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 title Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State (Delhi Administration. See AIR 1962 SC 253 title State Vs. Jagjit Singh. In the present case other female co-accused were released on bail because there is special provision for bail to woman and minor children even in criminal offence of homicide amounting to murder as per section 437 of code of criminal procedure 1973. Other female co-accused were released on bail as per special provision of bail granted to woman and minor children. Other female co-accused were released on bail as per special provision of bail granted to woman and minor children. It is held that special provision of bail to woman and minor children is not applicable to male co-accused in heinous criminal offence. In the present case dying declaration was given by deceased and in dying declaration there is direct allegation against male co-accused petitioner and learned trial is under process of recording prosecution evidence. Learned trial Court has already recorded statements of fifteen prosecution witnesses. Court is of the opinion that it is not expedient in the ends of justice to release male co-accused on bail at this stage of the case. Court is of the opinion that if male co-accused is released on bail at this stage then interest of State and general public will be adversely effected. Court is of the opinion that if male co-accused is released on bail at this stage then trial of the present case will also be adversely effected. It was held in case reported in AIR 1957 Rajasthan 10 title Mt Choki Vs. State that special treatment of woman and children in bail matter is not inconsistent with Article 15 of Constitution of India. 8. Submission of learned Additional Advocate General that if male co-accused is released on bail at this stage then male co-accused will induce and threat prosecution witnesses and the trial of present case will be adversely effected and on this ground bail petition be rejected is accepted for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. There is apprehension in the mind of Court that if male co-accused is released on bail at this stage of case then male co-accused will induce and threat prosecution witnesses during the trial of case. Court is of the opinion that allegations against the petitioner are very heinous and grave in nature. In view of the fact that deceased female had committed suicide in her prime age of youth court is of the opinion that it is not expedient in the ends of justice to release male co-accused on bail at this stage of present case. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in negative. Point No.2 (Final order). 9. In view of findings on point No.1 bail petition filed by petitioner male accused under Section 439 of code of criminal procedure 1973 is rejected. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in negative. Point No.2 (Final order). 9. In view of findings on point No.1 bail petition filed by petitioner male accused under Section 439 of code of criminal procedure 1973 is rejected. Observation made hereinabove is strictly for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition and it shall not effect merits of case in any manner. Learned trial Court will expeditiously dispose of criminal case. Bail petition disposed of. All pending application(s) if any also disposed of.