Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 129 (HP)

Narayan Singh v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2018-01-10

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2018
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J —The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 03 of 2017, dated 21.01.2017, under Sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") and Sections 6 and 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as " POCSO Act") registered at Women Police Station, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. 2. As per the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, 21.01.2017 the prosecutrix, who is a minor (name withheld) , accompanied by her mother reported to the police that she is studying in 7th Class in Government Senior Secondary School, Galma. As per the prosecutrix, her parents have taken divorce and she lives with her father, younger brother and ''taya''. In the month of February, 2016, the father of the prosecutrix (petitioner herein) came in her room and sexually assaulted her. Thereafter, the petitioner sexually assaulted her daily and she did not divulge this fact to anyone, as he had threatened her. In July, 2016, the petitioner married another lady and whenever the step mother of the prosecutrix was away to her parents'' house, the petitioner committed sexual assault on her. The prosecutrix has further alleged that 2-3 months back, when no one was present in the house, her ''taya'' came and inappropriately touched in her private parts and also threatened her. On 20.01.2017, the prosecutrix came to her nani''s house and narrated the entire episode to her nani. The investigation in the case was conducted. The prosecutrix and the accused were medically examined. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The petitioner and another accused were arrested. The co-accused was released on bail by this Hon''ble Court. After completion of the investigation the challan was presented in the learned Trial Court. Now, the case is listed before the learned Trail Court on 12.3.2018 for prosecution evidence. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard. The co-accused was released on bail by this Hon''ble Court. After completion of the investigation the challan was presented in the learned Trial Court. Now, the case is listed before the learned Trail Court on 12.3.2018 for prosecution evidence. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and prays that he may be released on bail. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions received from the Investigating Officer, submitted that almost five witnesses in this case has already been examined by the prosecution and now, the case is listed for examination of the remaining prosecution witnesses on 12th March, 2018 before the learned Trial Court and the case is likely to be completed very soon. He has further argued that in case, the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and also flee from justice, so the present is a fit case where the bail is required to be dismissed. In rebuttal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is behind the bars since long and he is not in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and is also not in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail. 5. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police record in detail. 6. At this stage, taking into consideration the material, which has come on record, specific allegations leveled against the petitioner, the age of the prosecutrix and also the relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix, this Court finds that the petitioner is in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and he is also in a position to flee from justice, thus the present is not a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. 7. The petition, which sans merit, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. 7. The petition, which sans merit, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. However, keeping in view the overall aspects of the case and the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking a direction to the learned Trial Court for expeditious disposal of the matter, the learned Trail Court is expected to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible and the parties are also expected to make every endeavour to assist the learned Trail Court for speedy disposal of the case.