Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1788 (HP)

Rohit Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2019-11-27

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. 170 of 2019, dated 20.09.2019, under Sections 376 IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, Sirmour, District Nahan, 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 20.09.2019 the prosecutrix (name withheld) made a written complaint to the police, wherein she alleged that she is 29 years old and resident of Haryana. The prosecutrix further stated that for the last 14 years she used to reside in a rented accommodation at Moginand, Nahan. She used to work in factories and about three years back she came in contact with the petitioner, who hails from District Mainpuri, U.P. The petitioner told her that he is unmarried and wants to marry her. Gradually, the petitioner gained the trust of the prosecutrix and taking advantage of trust, he had sexual intercourse with her in the rented accommodation. The petitioner told her that he will have a word with his parents qua their marriage and he regularly sexually molested the prosecutrix. Lastly, on 06.08.2019 the petitioner went to his home and told her that he will soon marry her. Thereafter, the petitioner stopped picking up the telephonic calls of the prosecutrix and his both mobiles numbers were switched off. As per the prosecutrix, the petitioner on the pretext of marrying her, sexually exploited her. Upon the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, police registered a case and the investigation ensued. The prosecutrix was medically examined. Police prepared the spot map and also recorded the statements of the witnesses. In order to evade his arrest, the petitioner absconded and on 19.10.2019 he was arrested. Police lifted the scientific samples for examination and the report is awaited. As per the police, investigation is complete and soon challan will be presented in the learned Trial Court. Police prepared the spot map and also recorded the statements of the witnesses. In order to evade his arrest, the petitioner absconded and on 19.10.2019 he was arrested. Police lifted the scientific samples for examination and the report is awaited. As per the police, investigation is complete and soon challan will be presented in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a heinous offence. In case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, as he is resident of Uttar Pradesh, so the bail application of the petitioner 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 is trying to impress upon his parents, so that they agree for his marriage with the prosecutrix and in fact this case is registered by the prosecutrix due to some misunderstanding. 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. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the petition may be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. Conversely, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed a heinous crime and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, as he is resident of Uttar Pradesh, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may 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 likely to be presented in the learned Trial Court soon. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and his custody is not at all required by the police, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and his custody is not at all required by the police, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, the fact that the investigation is complete and the challan will be presented in the Court soon, custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, considering the fact that the petitioner is willing to impress upon his parents so that they agree for his marriage with the prosecutrix, the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the overall material, which has come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case so granted, and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, 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. 170 of 2019, dated 20.09.2019, under Sections 376 IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, Sirmour, District Nahan, 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. (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. (iv) That the petitioner will not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever and if the bail petitioner tries to misconduct or to tamper with the prosecution evidence, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be liable to be rejected. 8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.