Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 347 (HP)

Mehar Chand v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2018-03-14

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. 33 of 2018, dated 21.02.2018, under Section 3(1) (r) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Bhuntar, District, Kullu, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petitions, the petitioners 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 be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 16.02.2018 live telecast of programme ''Pariksha Per Charcha'' of Hon''ble Prime Minister was being shown to the students of Government High School, Chestha, in the house of SMC Pradhan. As per the prosecution, students belonging to scheduled caste category were made to sit separately from that of students of general category. Students of scheduled caste were made to sit in a shed of horses. Further, the students of scheduled caste were made to sit separately from the students of general category while having food. An enquiry was ordered by the Deputy Commissioner and enquiry is still going on and its report is awaited. The petitioners and their co-accused, on the basis of caste, discriminated the students, thus, a case was registered against the petitioners and co-accused and the investigation ensued. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and spot map was prepared. The record qua caste of the petitioners and co-accused was obtained. Except the petitioners, accused persons have been enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court. As per the prosecution, petitioner Mehar Chand has joined the investigation and co-operating in the same. However, petitioner Amar Singh has not joined the investigation. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail applications may be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 5. 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. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars. 5. 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. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that taking into consideration seriousness of the offence, the applications of the petitioners may be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned counsel for the petitioners have argued that the petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so they may be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and also taking into consideration the fact that the accused persons, except the petitioners, have already been enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court, this Court finds that the present are fit cases where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail is required to be exercised in their favour. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners, who have been made as accused, in FIR No. 33 of 2018, dated 21.02.2018, under Section 3(1) (r) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Bhuntar, District, Kullu, H.P., shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest, 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 Investigating Officer. 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. 8. x xX x xX x xX 9. In view of the above, the petitions are disposed of. Copy dasti.