Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 665 (HP)

Sanjay Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2017-06-14

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2017
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the status report and the I.O. Inspector/SHO Sanjeev Kumar, Police Station, Rampur has produced the record. 2. Heard. The petitioner is one of the accused in FIR No. 21 of 2017 registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against him and his co-accused Ram Kumar in Police Station, Rampur on 22.1.2017 with the allegations that during the night intervening 21/22.1.2017 they both picked up quarrel with Ram Krishan, the deceased at a stage when noticed him molesting the wife of the accused-petitioner in his quarter at village Taklech. 3. The deceased is none else but being the son of the real aunt (Mossi) of the accused-petitioner is his first cousin. The accused-petitioner was serving as Constable at the relevant time in Police Post, Taklech. He had been residing there in rented accommodation taken on rent from his co-accused Ram Kumar. On 21.1.2017, his wife namely Durgi had also came to Taklech. The deceased accompanied by one Naresh Kumar also came to Taklech to the quarter of the accused-petitioner. During the night they all including accused Ram Kumar consumed liquor in the quarter of the accused-petitioner. The wife of the accused-petitioner prepared meal for them. They had their meal and as in the quarter of the accused-petitioner sufficient space was not available to accommodate the deceased and Naresh Kumar, therefore he went to the house of his co-accused Ram Kumar for arranging space where they could sleep. After having meal while Naresh Kumar went to another room and slept there, the deceased left behind in the bedroom of the accused-petitioner where the wife of the latter was also present. The deceased allegedly started molesting the wife of the accused-petitioner to which she objected to. On this, hot exchanges had taken place between the deceased and the wife of the accused-petitioner. On hearing of this, the accused-petitioner and his co-accused Ram Kumar came to the room and noticed the deceased misbehaving with his wife. They caught hold the deceased and administered beatings to him with kicks and fisticuffs. The accused-petitioner made Naresh Kumar who was sleeping in another room to awake and thrashed him also and made utterances why they had come there to humiliate him. Said Naresh Kumar on apprehending danger to his life fled away from that place. They caught hold the deceased and administered beatings to him with kicks and fisticuffs. The accused-petitioner made Naresh Kumar who was sleeping in another room to awake and thrashed him also and made utterances why they had come there to humiliate him. Said Naresh Kumar on apprehending danger to his life fled away from that place. The deceased allegedly started arguing with accused-petitioner and his co-accused and as such was caught hold by them and administered beating. Later on, he also fled away from the quarter of the accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner and his co-accused followed him up to a certain distance i.e. road and then returned to the quarter. 4. As per further allegations appeared in the record, the accused-petitioner had made a call through his Cell phone to the father of the deceased and proclaimed that he had beheaded his son Ram Krishan (deceased) and that it is now he who is his son. The father of the deceased and other relatives could not visit village Taklech immediately being odd hours as well as for want of transport facility. They, however, visited village Taklech on the following morning i.e. 22.1.2017 and inquired from the accused-petitioner about the whereabouts of the deceased. Naresh Kumar also came with them to the quarter of the accused-petitioner. He collected the Helmet of the deceased and also his other belongings. They searched the deceased here and there in village Taklech. The accused-petitioner also remained with them at that time. The dead body of deceased was recovered from a nallah at village Taklech. It is thereafter the police of Police Station, Rampur was informed. The police arrived at the spot and started conducting investigation of the case. The investigation is now complete. The challan stands filed against the accused-petitioner and his co-accused which presently is at the stage of consideration of charge. 5. Having heard learned counsel representing the accused-petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State as well as going through the record of the case, there is no quarrel so as to the accused-petitioner and deceased were first cousin. There was no enmity between them or their family as nothing to this effect could surface on record during the course of investigation conducted by the police. The deceased had come to Taklech along with Naresh Kumar as guests of his cousin, the accused-petitioner. There was no enmity between them or their family as nothing to this effect could surface on record during the course of investigation conducted by the police. The deceased had come to Taklech along with Naresh Kumar as guests of his cousin, the accused-petitioner. The investigation conducted by the police further reveals that they had consumed liquor. They all had also their dinner in the quarter of the accused-petitioner. Smt. Durgi, the wife of the accused-petitioner was present there. Prima-facie the prosecution case that the deceased had molested the wife of the accused- petitioner also seems to be correct. On this the accused-petitioner and his co-accused administered beating not only to the deceased but to Naresh Kumar aforesaid also seems to be correct. While Naresh Kumar had fled away from that place the deceased left behind in the quarter. Later on when thrashed by the accused the deceased also seems to have run away from the quarter of the accused-petitioner. It is difficult to believe at this stage that he was beaten to death by the accused-petitioner and thereafter his dead body thrown in the nallah. The possibility of he having fallen down while fleeing away from the place of occurrence cannot be ruled out. The nature of injury i.e. head injury noticed by the Medical Officer while conducting autopsy on the dead body could most probably have been suffered by way of fall. The present also seems to be not a case where it can be said that the accused-petitioner has killed the deceased in a planned manner. On the other hand the scuffle rather seems to have taken place on account of molestation of the wife of the accused-petitioner by the deceased. Therefore, the present is not a case where it can be said that the accused-petitioner had killed the deceased in a planned manner. The incident rather seems to be sparked off at the spur of moment i.e. on seeing the wife of the accused-petitioner was being molested by the deceased. 6. The accused-petitioner was serving as Constable in Police department. He is permanent resident of village Lunalot, Tehsil Anni, District Kullu. There is no likelihood of his jumping over the bail. He was arrested on 23.1.2017 and is still in custody. The investigation in the case is now complete. Challan has also been filed against him. 7. 6. The accused-petitioner was serving as Constable in Police department. He is permanent resident of village Lunalot, Tehsil Anni, District Kullu. There is no likelihood of his jumping over the bail. He was arrested on 23.1.2017 and is still in custody. The investigation in the case is now complete. Challan has also been filed against him. 7. Therefore, having regard to the given facts and circumstances and the evidence collected by the investigating agency at this stage, I find the present a fit case where further detention of the accused-petitioner in custody is not warranted. He, as such, is ordered to be admitted on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo/Judicial Magistrate at Rampur. He shall further abide by the following conditions; That he shall:- (a). 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). not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (c). 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; (d). not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 8. 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. 9. The observations hereinabove shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and have no bearing on the merits of the case. The application is accordingly allowed and stands disposed of.