Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 179 (HP)

Gurmeet Singh v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2020-02-28

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail in case FIR No. 135/2019, dated 29.06.2019, under Sections 376, 354D, 451, 366, 511, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC), registered at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he is permanent resident of Himachal Pradesh 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 29.06.2019, the prosecutrix (name withheld) presented a complaint in the Police Station, Nurpur, against the petitioner, wherein it has been alleged that in the year 2017, she was studying in Girls School, Nurpur and was residing in her maternal grand father's house. Since the cousin sister of the petitioner, who was a bus conductor by profession, was also studying with the prosecutrix, she used to interact with the petitioner frequently. On 18.10.2018, when she was coming back from the house of her maternal grand father and was standing at bus stand, Jassur, the petitioner came there on his motorcycle and started asking her about the bus timings, to which, the prosecutrix replied that the bus will left for her village at about 4/4:15 p.m. and offered lift to the prosecutrix. Initially, the prosecutrix refused his proposal, however, at the insistence of the petitioner, she agreed to go with him. Accordingly, the petitioner took the prosecutrix to his house, where neither his mother nor his sister was present. Thereafter, he offered water and sweets to the prosecutrix and when she inquired about his mother and sister, he forcibly got her laid on the bed and ravished her. When the prosecutrix regain consciousness, he dropped her back to the Jassur bus stand. The petitioner also threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone or else she would be killed. The petitioner continued to threaten her and on 16.05.2019 he came outside her college, snatched her mobile phone and removed its SIM card and used filthy language. When the prosecutrix regain consciousness, he dropped her back to the Jassur bus stand. The petitioner also threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone or else she would be killed. The petitioner continued to threaten her and on 16.05.2019 he came outside her college, snatched her mobile phone and removed its SIM card and used filthy language. On 28.06.2019, when mother and aunt of the prosecutrix were traveling in his bus, he also misbehaved with them. On the same day, in the evening he alongwith his relatives and friends came to her house in vehicles and threatened her to take away with him. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, FIR No. 135/2019, dated 29.06.2019, under Sections 376, 354D, 451, 366, 511, 506 and 34 IPC came to be registered against the petitioner. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a 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 reports, 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 permanent resident of District Kangra 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. He has argued that keeping in view the material, which has come on record, and also the age of the petitioner, the bail application be allowed. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a heinous 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. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a heinous 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. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have occurred, the fact that petitioner wanted to marry the prosecutrix, the fact that the petitioner is permanent resident of District Kangra and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions of bail, if so granted, the fact that the investigation is complete, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, 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. 135/2019, dated 29.06.2019, under Sections 376, 354D, 451, 366, 511, 506 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, 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. 7. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. Copy dasti.