Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 13 (HP)

Harish Kumar v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2018-01-02

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2018
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The present bail applications have been moved by the petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 327 of 2017, dated 17. 12. 2017, under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 and 382 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), registered at Police Station Sadar, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H. P. 2. As per the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They are residents of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, thus they may be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 17. 12. 2017 Shri Ramesh Chand (complainant) got recorded his statement with the police under Section 154 Cr. P. C. in R. H. Hamirpur. As per the statement of the complainant, he works as Junior Engineer at Bharari in I&PH Department and on16. 12. 2017 he took lift in a truck and came to Khaidru. When he was standing at Khaidru, around 08:30 p. m. the petitioners, who were inebriated, came in a vehicle and offered lift to him. On the persistent requests of the petitioners the complainant boarded the vehicle. The vehicle was being driven rashly, so the complainant asked to drive slow. On this the petitioners started quarreling with him and near a bridge they started beating the complainant. The petitioners gave beatings to him with a rod and they also gave a blow on his head with a beer bottle. The petitioners also pushed the complainant due to which he fell and they also restrained him to proceed further. As per the complainant, the petitioner also took his bag, which contained his mobile phone and official documents. The petitioners threatened to do away with his life. After some time, the complainant stopped a vehicle and the occupants of the vehicle made a phone call to his son and his son shifted the complainant to the hospital. On the basis of the statement, so made by the complainant, a case was registered and the police investigation ensued. The complainant was medically examined. The complainant was referred to Dr. On the basis of the statement, so made by the complainant, a case was registered and the police investigation ensued. The complainant was medically examined. The complainant was referred to Dr. RPGMC, Tanda, for further treatment, wherefrom he was further referred to PGI, Chandigarh. As per the prosecution, medical opinion is still awaited. The spot map was prepared and the broken pieces of beer bottle were taken into possession. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. On 24. 12. 2017, the petitioners participated in the investigation and petitioner Dixit Thakur produced a bag, which contained two official files, a lunch box and two diaries. The petitioners also produced an iron rod, which was used in beating the complainant. The petitioners are showing their ignorance about the mobile phone, which is yet to be recovered. As per the prosecution, the petitioners are contractors by profession and it was found that the complainant had purchased sand and gravel from them. The investigation is at its nascent stage and medical opinion is awaited. The petitioners are very clever persons and they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and can influence the investigation. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners may be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Law Officer for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are joining and co-operating in the investigation and their custodial interrogation is not at all required. He has also argued that by keeping the petitioners behind the bars no fruitful purpose will be served. The petitioners are residents of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so they may be released on bail. Conversely, the Law Officer has argued that in case the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. There is anger in the society against the petitioners. He has prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners may be dismissed. 6. Conversely, the Law Officer has argued that in case the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. There is anger in the society against the petitioners. He has prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners may be dismissed. 6. At this moment, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners are residents of the place and joining and co-operating in the investigation and they are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and also considering the nature of the offence, material, which has come on record and also other ancillary circumstances, the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, is required to be exercised in their favour. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that the petitioners be released on bail, in the event of arrest, in case FIR No. 327 of 2017, dated 17. 12. 2017, under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 and 382 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H. P. , on their furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioners will join investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. (ii) That the petitioners will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (iii) That the petitioners 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 Investigating Officer or Court. 7. In view of the above, the petitions are disposed of. Copy dasti.