Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1587 (HP)

Dhanvir Singh v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2019-10-24

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. 57 of 2019, dated 24.08.2019, under Sections 376, 452, 354D and 506 IPC, registered in Police Station Sangrah, District Sirmour, 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 resident of the place and 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 24.08.2019 police were informed that the petitioner following the prosecutrix (name withheld) came to her house. The prosecutrix got recorded her statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. and alleged that she is student of B.a. 2nd year and 5-6 months back she was acquainted with the petitioner. She used to talk with the petitioner and he used to come with her towards her house. On 23.08.2019 the petitioner asked the prosecutrix to have a word with him, but she refused. The prosecutrix further stated that she came back home and the petitioner stopped at Haripur and on 24.08.2019, at about 06/07:00 a.m., the petitioner came to her home and started pressing hard for marrying her. The petitioner also tried to sexually molest the prosecutrix and also threatened her. Upon the statement of the prosecutrix, police registered a case and the investigation ensued. Statement of the prosecution was recorded under Section 164(5) Cr.P.C., wherein she stated that on 23.08.2019 when she was coming home, the prosecutrix sexually molested her in the jungle and when she raised hue and cry he fled away. The prosecutrix further stated that on 24.08.2019 the petitioner came to her home and tried to sexually molest her. On 27.08.2019 the prosecutrix was medically examined. Police, during the course of investigation, prepared the spot map and also photographed the spot. Police also made relevant recoveries and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On 30.08.2019 the petitioner was arrested and medically examined. Police collected the scientific samples and sent the same to laboratory for analysis. Report of DNA profiling is awaited. Police, during the course of investigation, prepared the spot map and also photographed the spot. Police also made relevant recoveries and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On 30.08.2019 the petitioner was arrested and medically examined. Police collected the scientific samples and sent the same to laboratory for analysis. Report of DNA profiling is awaited. On 15.10.2019 presented the challan in the learned Trial Court and the same is listed on 05.11.2019. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed heinous crime. There is possibility that in case at this stage the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice. The petitioner can also tamper with the prosecution evidence, so his 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 petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has further argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete and challan is presented in the learned Trial Court. He has prayed that the petition be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed heinous crime and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that 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 investigation is complete and challan is presented in the learned Trial Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. 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 investigation is complete and challan is presented in the learned Trial Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner as also the prosecutrix, the version of the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C, the manner in which the alleged offence is alleged to have been committed, the fact that the petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, investigation in the case is complete, the custody of the petitioner is not required by the police, the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, if so granted, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, 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. 57 of 2019, dated 24.08.2019, under Sections 376, 452, 354D and 506 IPC, registered in Police Station Sangrah, District Sirmour, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five 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.