Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1562 (HP)

Vikram Om v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2019-10-22

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2019
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. 175 of 2019, dated 13.09.2019, under Section 4 of Immoral traffic Prevention Act, 1956, and Section 370 IPC, registered in Police Station Dhalli, Shimla, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is 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 for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 12.09.2019 police got a tip off that a person from Punjab, namely Varinder Singh (co-accused), is running a racket of prostitution. Police prepared a trap and a fake client made whatsapp call and message to Varinder Singh. Initially co-accused Varinder Singh sent some of the photographs of the girls for selection. On being selected, he asked for advance of Rs. 500/- and total amount of Rs. 12,000/- was demanded by him. He also sent the account details of his account in which total Rs. 1,000/- (Rs. 500/- and Rs. 500/-) were sent alongwith IDs and booking details of Pine View Cottage & Restaurant, Dhalli. Co-accused Varinder Singh also told that he will take Rs. 2000/- when he will hand over the girls. At about 10:15 p.m. Varinder Singh in vehicle, having registration No. PB65AV-9321, came there alongwith two girls and on suspecting the presence of police, he tried to flee with the girls, but was apprehended. Police recovered four currency notes of Rs. 500/-, total Rs. 2000/-, from him, which were allegedly given by the fake clients. The girls disclosed their names as Rajwant Kaur and Gurpreet Kaur and divulged that they are working under co-accused Varinder Singh for the last 5-6 months and for prostitution he used to pay very meagre amount to them and rest is kept by him. Police registered a case and the investigation ensued. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. Investigation also revealed that co-accused Varinder Singh is actively involved in prostitution and he used to run a sex racket, so on 13.09.2019 he was arrested. Police registered a case and the investigation ensued. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. Investigation also revealed that co-accused Varinder Singh is actively involved in prostitution and he used to run a sex racket, so on 13.09.2019 he was arrested. Both the girls were kept in Naari Niketan and their statements were recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the said girls were handed over to their respective families. During the course of investigation, Varinder Singh divulged that he prepared website for providing girls and started dealing in prostitution. Police also examined the said website and whatsapp chat. Police found that Varinder Sing paid Rs. 20,000/- to some unknown person for preparing the website and during the investigation said unknown person was traced to be Vikram @ Andy (petitioner herein). During the course of investigation it was unearthed that the petitioner on the asking of co-accused Varinder Singh prepared the website for him and for this he was paid Rs. 20,000/- by the co-accused. Police obtained the call records, which also demonstrate the involvement of the petitioner. On 22.09.2019 the petitioner was arrested and he disclosed that he prepared the website for co-accused Vikram Singh upon his asking. Police made the relevant recoveries. As per the police, the petitioner is resident of Punjab and it is prayed that keeping in view the seriousness of the crime, the manner in which the crime was committed, in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so the present bail application be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. The main accused, i.e., accused Vikram Singh, has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court. He has further argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and his custody is not at all required by the police, so the petition be allowed and the petitioner be also enlarged on bail. The main accused, i.e., accused Vikram Singh, has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court. He has further argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and his custody is not at all required by the police, so the petition be allowed and the petitioner be also enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner designed a website for the main accused and through this website main accused Vikram Singh was running a sex racket and dealing in prostitution, so the petitioner has major role in the instant case. He has further argued that the petitioner is resident of Punjab and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. The petitioner can thwart the process of law, in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when the main accused has already been enlarged on bail, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the statements of the girls, one of whom is 31 years old, the material which has come on record and without discussing the same at this stage, the fact that the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for the an unlimited period, the fact that the main accused, i.e., Vikram Singh, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 175 of 2019, dated 13.09.2019, under Section 4 of Immoral traffic Preention Act, 1956, and Section 370 IPC, registered in Police Station Dhalli, Shimla, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required. (ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (iii) That the petitioner 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. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.