Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1374 (HP)

Rangila Ram v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2018-07-24

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2018
JUDGMENT Tarlok Singh Chauhan J. (Oral) - The petitioner has sought regular bail in FIR No. 148 of 2018, dated 25.6.2018, registered at Police Station, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. under Sections 376, 506 IPC, coupled with Section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act and section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 2. The specific case of the petitioner is that he has been falsely implicated and in fact is incapable of committing the offence as he is disabled and handicap by 75% disability/locomotor impairment. It was in this background that this Court had been awaiting the report of the FSL. 3. Today, the report of FSL has been produced before this Court and perusal of the same prima-facie shows that the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, for the time being, remain unsubstantiated. However, it is clarified that this is only a prima-facie opinion and shall have no bearing on the trial of the case. 4. However, taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I find that this is a fit case where the petitioner ought to be released on bail. 5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 148 of 2018, dated 25.6.2018, registered at Police Station, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. under Sections 376, 506 IPC, coupled with Section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act and section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. with the following conditions:- (i) he shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and 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; (ii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (iii) he shall 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 Police Officer; and (iv) he shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sarkaghat, is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc. Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013. 6. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove. 7. Petition stands disposed of.