Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 14 (HP)

Sonu @ Tashi v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2018-01-02

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2018
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The present bail applications have been maintained by the petitioners under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking their release in case FIR No. 135 of 2017, dated 27. 11. 2017, under Sections 341, 323 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), registered at Police Station East Shimla, District Shimla, H. P. 2. As per the petitioners, they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They are 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. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, on 26. 11. 2017, police of Police Post Kasumpti received information qua a quarrel, which took place in APG University. The police personnel visited the spot and they were informed that a boy has been shifted for treatment to IGMC, Shimla, so the police visited IGMC, Shimla. In IGMC, Shimla, Shri Rajesh Kumar, Assistant Sports Officer, AGP University, Shimla, got his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr. P. C. wherein he stated that he has additional charge of Boys Hostel, APG University. On 26. 11. 2017, at about 09:30 p. m. , after dining, when he came outside, he saw Leki (one of the petitioners, who are students of APG University) alongwith his friends was thrashing one Munna Nizi, who is student of AGP University. He has further stated that Leki hit Munna Nizi with some pointed object. Shri Robin Mahajan, Chief Warden, rescued the Munna Nizi from the petitioners. The injured was initially administered first aid in APG University and subsequently he was shifted to IGMC, Shimla. On the basis the statement of the complainant, police investigation ensued. A case was registered against the petitioners and the medico legal certificate of the injured was procured. Spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were also recorded. The injured was further referred to PGI, Chandigarh. As per the opinion of SMO, PGI, Chandigarh, the injured was on ventilation in ICU and not fit for giving any statement. Opinion on nature of injury was reserved. The petitioners participated in the investigation and were arrested on 29. 11. 2017. The injured was further referred to PGI, Chandigarh. As per the opinion of SMO, PGI, Chandigarh, the injured was on ventilation in ICU and not fit for giving any statement. Opinion on nature of injury was reserved. The petitioners participated in the investigation and were arrested on 29. 11. 2017. As per the police, the petitioners gave beatings to the injured and used some pointed object to cause injury on his head. Petitioner, Kingang Thinley, gave a disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and as sequel thereto a screw driver was recovered at his instance, which was taken into possession. On 30. 11. 2017 the injured was discharged from PGI, Chandigarh. Thereafter, statement of the injured was recorded under Section 161 Cr. P. C. and Sections 147 and 149 IPC were substituted with Section 34 IPC. As per the prosecution, final medical opinion is still to be obtained and challan is yet to be presented in the Court. 4. Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioners have argued that the petitioners are innocent and they are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has further argued that keeping in view the age of the petitioners and the fact that they are students, they may be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the Law Officer, has argued that taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence and the fact that the petitioners may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, the applications of the petitioners may be dismissed. 5. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail. 6. At this stage taking into considering the age of the petitioners, the fact that they are the students of APG University and are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and also the fact that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars for an unlimited period, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail is required to be exercised in their favour. Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners, who have been arrested by the police of Police Station East Shimla, District Shimla, H. P. , in connection with FIR No. 135 of2017, dated 27. 1. 2017, under Sections 341, 323 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station East Shimla, District Shimla, H. P. , they shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioners will appear before the learned Trial Court as and when required. (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.