Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1783 (HP)

Sanjay Deshta v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2019-11-26

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2019
JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 132 of 2019, dated 28.10.2019, under Section 354(A) IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act, registered in Police Station Rohru, District 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 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 sending him behind the bars, so he be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 28.10.2019 upon the receipt of the report from Government Senior Secondary School, Tikkari, qua sexual abuse in school, police started investigation. Police recorded the statements of girl students, which revealed that the petitioner, who is Lecturer Geography, in the said school, used to tease the girl students. Thereafter, the police registered a case and the further investigation ensued. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. Statements of eight girl students were recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. All the students stated that the petitioner under the garb of taking selfie with them used to inappropriately touch them. One of the students stated that the petitioner made her watch explicit videos. The girl students further stated that the petitioner used to call them alone in Geography Laboratory, where he used to touch and kiss them. The petitioner further used to tell the students not to disclose his activities to anyone. The girl students divulged the incident to one female teacher, who further divulged it to other female teachers. Thereafter, the Principal of the said school conducted an impartial inquiry and found the allegations true. Resultantly, on 30.10.2019 the petitioner was suspended. On 03.11.2019 the petitioner handed over his mobile phone to the police, which was taken into possession and report from SFSL, Junga, is awaited. As per the police, there is anger in the society qua the offences committed by the petitioner. The petitioner is evading his arrest and upon the orders of the Hon'ble High Court on 31.10.2019 he joined the investigation. As per the police, there is anger in the society qua the offences committed by the petitioner. The petitioner is evading his arrest and upon the orders of the Hon'ble High Court on 31.10.2019 he joined the investigation. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious crime, he is very clever and influential person. There is possibility that in case at this stage if 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 Senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 5. The learned Senior 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 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 sending the petitioner behind the bars, as he is resident of the place and he is joining and co-operating in the investigation. He has further argued that the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, so the bail application be allowed. Conversely, the learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence, so at this stage, 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 Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence. His custodial interrogation is not at all required by the police, as he is resident of the place and is joining and co-operating in the investigation, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. His custodial interrogation is not at all required by the police, as he is resident of the place and is joining and co-operating in the investigation, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the statements of the girl students recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. where at many places word 'beta' has come, considering the age of the petitioner, the fact that the petitioner is resident of the place neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the other allegations, which have come on record, the fact that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case granted, the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, as he is joining and co-operating in the investigation and also considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest, is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 132 of 2019, dated 28.10.2019, under Section 354(A) IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act, registered in Police Station Rohru, District Shimla, 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 Investigating Officer. 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.