Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 241 (HP)

Chander Mohan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-03-18

ANOOP CHITKARA

body2020
JUDGMENT Anoop Chitkara. J. - The petitioner, who is under arrest, on being arraigned as accused in FIR number 179/19, dated 17.12.2019, registered under Sections 307, 341, 323, 506, 427, 201, 120-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in the file of Police Station Amb, District Una, HP, disclosing non-bailable offences, has come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC, seeking regular bail. 2. Status report stands filed. I have seen the status report(s) as well as the Police file to the extent it was necessary for deciding the present petition. 3. Prior to the present bail petition, the petitioner had filed a petition under Section 439 CrPC, before learned Additional Sessions, Judge (I), Una, HP. However, vide order dated 27.1.2020, the Court dismissed the petition. FACTS 4. The gist of the First Information Report and the investigation is that on 16.12.2019, Police Station, Amb, received a telephonic information that some unknown person have beaten another person near Railway Station. After that the police party reached the spot of occurrence and took the injured to Civil Hospital, Amb. The injured person was medically examined and the doctor opined that he had received four injuries from blunt weapon. The said injured person revealed his name as Rajinder Singh. Consequently, the investigation officer HC Jagpal Singh recorded the statement of injured Rajinder Singh under Section 154 Cr.PC. On which, FIR No.179/19, dated 17.12.2019, under Section 307, 341, 323, 506, 427, 120-B read with Section 34 IPC was registered in Police Station Amb, District Una. 5. The injured stated in his statement that he is an advocate by profession and on the night of 16 th December, 2019, around 8.15 p.m., when he was strolling, then one motorcyclist came from behind and hit him on his legs. Due to the impact, he fell down and in the meanwhile another motorcycle came there. In all four persons alighted therefrom and started giving beatings to him from the baseball bat. One of them had an empty liquor bottle and he hit him with the said bottle. The face of all those persons were muffled. After that the police conducted the investigation and collected CCTV footage. On the basis of recording of CCTV, the police was able to trace the accused persons. 6. One of them had an empty liquor bottle and he hit him with the said bottle. The face of all those persons were muffled. After that the police conducted the investigation and collected CCTV footage. On the basis of recording of CCTV, the police was able to trace the accused persons. 6. The investigation further revealed that in the Bar Association, Amb, some dispute was going on between two groups of lawyers relating to strike against the behaviour of one of the Presiding Officers of the Court. It further revealed that the accused persons belonging to the group were against the strike. Consequently, conspiracy was hatched by accused petitioner Anil Rana, Advocate. He called the non-advocates from outside with a view to cause injuries upon his colleague Rajinder Singh, Advocate. After further investigation, the police added Sections 307 and 120-B of IPC. 7. On 2.1.2020, Police arrested accused Ravi Kumar, Rohit Kumar and Chander Mohan. During Police custody, these people disclosed that they had engaged accused Neeraj @ Chhantu, Deepak Kumar and Neeraj @ Chhantuka, as the persons to cause injuries to Shri Rajinder Singh, Advocate. Subsequently, the police arrested the petitioner. PREVIOUS CRIMINAL HISTORY 8. The bail petitioner has no criminal history. ANALYSIS AND REASONING: 9. I have heard Mr. Manoj Pathak & Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocates for the petitioner and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, Ram Lal Thakur, Learned Assistant Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer for the State and Mr. N.K. Thakur & Mr. N.S. Chandel, learned Senior Advocates assisted by Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate for the complainant. 10. The Pre-trial incarceration needs to be justified depending upon the heinous nature of the offence, terms of the sentence prescribed in the Statute for such a crime, accused fleeing from justice, hampering the investigation, and doing away with witnesses. The Court is under the Constitutional obligation to safeguard the interests of the victim, the accused, the society, and the State. 11. Given the above reasoning, in my considered opinion, the judicial custody of the petitioner/accused is not going to serve any purpose whatsoever, and I am inclined to grant bail on the following grounds, but subject to stringent conditions: a) The injuries were caused on legs and not on vital part of body. 11. Given the above reasoning, in my considered opinion, the judicial custody of the petitioner/accused is not going to serve any purpose whatsoever, and I am inclined to grant bail on the following grounds, but subject to stringent conditions: a) The injuries were caused on legs and not on vital part of body. b) The petitioner is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the memo of parties, as such presence can always be secured. f) The petitioner has no criminal history. 12. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in the present case, in connection with the FIR mentioned above, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of INR 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Add I. Chief Judicial Magistrate or any Judicial Magistrate of the concerned District. 13. The Court attesting and accepting the personal and surety bonds shall ascertain the identity of the bail-petitioner, his family members, and of sureties, through AADHAR Card, Pan Card, Ration Card, etc. The petitioner shall mention phone numbers and other details, on the reverse page of the bonds. 14. The Counsel for the accused and the attesting official shall explain all conditions of this bail to the petitioner. 15. This Court is granting the bail, subject to the conditions mentioned herein. The petitioner/accused undertakes to comply with all directions given in this order, and the furnishing of bail bonds by the petitioner/accused is acceptance of all such conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the Court which issues the summons or warrants, and shall furnish fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of such Court, if such Court directs to do so. b) The petitioner undertakes to attend the trial. c) The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. However, whenever the investigation takes place within the boundaries of the Police Station or the Police Post, then the accused shall not be called before 9 AM and shall be let off before 5 PM. d) The petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation and in case failed to do so, the investigating agency is free to move application for cancellation of bail. e) The petitioner shall not hamper the investigation. d) The petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation and in case failed to do so, the investigating agency is free to move application for cancellation of bail. e) The petitioner shall not hamper the investigation. f) The petitioner undertakes not to threaten or browbeat or use any pressure tactics on the victims, complainant, and witnesses. g) The petitioner shall neither influence nor try to control the investigating officer, in any manner whatsoever. h) The petitioner undertakes not to make any inducement threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the investigating officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence. i) In case the petitioner commits any offence prescribing the sentence of imprisonment of more than seven years, within thirty days of knowledge of such FIR, the petitioner shall intimate SHO of the present police station, with all the details of the present FIR as well as the new FIR. In such a situation, it shall be open for the State to apply to this Court for cancellation of this bail, if it deems fit and proper. j) Within 30 days from today, the petitioner shall sell, or surrender, all firearms along with ammunition, and arms licenses, if any, to the authority which had given such permission. k) The Petitioner shall not enter within a radius of five kilometers of the residence of the victim, measuring from the shortest route, until the recording of the statements of all witnesses, except Police officials, during trial. However irrespective of these conditions, the accused is permitted to visit his Lawyers, Courts and Hospitals. The petitioner shall inform the SHO of above-mentioned Police Station about the address where he would be residing. After the recording of the statements of the aforesaid witnesses, this condition shall automatically come to an end. In case of emergency, whenever, the accused is required to visit such area, then he shall take permission of the SHO/I.O. or any superior Officer of the concerned Police Station or of Pradhan/Up-Pradhan//Member of Panchayat, in whose jurisdiction, the residence of the victim, falls. But in no situation, he shall stay at this place for more than 24 hours at a stretch. But in no situation, he shall stay at this place for more than 24 hours at a stretch. This condition is being laid so that no trauma is caused to the victim, at least till the time of recording of the statement of the victim in Court. Such a condition is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable and the only purpose is that the victim is unable to come face to face with the accused and also has been imposed with a view that the accused is unable to influence the victim. In case the petitioner needs modification of this condition, then he may apply to this Court mentioning the reasons. l) Apart from above, in case the petitioner does not turn up before the Trial Court, then the trial Court may issue Non-Bailable warrants and send the petitioner to the Judicial Custody for the period for which the presence of the petitioner cannot be dispensed with. If the petitioner violates any other condition(s) as stipulated in this bail order, then the Trial Court may direct the Public Prosecutor to file a cancellation application before it and it shall be lawful and permissible for the Trial Court to cancel the bail. 13. This order of bail does not, in any manner, limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency, to investigate into the charges against the petitioner. 14. In case the petitioner finds the bail condition(s) as violating fundamental or other right, or any human right, or faces any other difficulty due to any condition, then, the petitioner may file a reasoned application for modification of such term(s). 15. The present bail order is only for the FIR mentioned above. It shall not be construed to be a blanket order of bail in all other cases, if any, registered against the petitioner. 16. The SHO/Additional SHO of the concerned Police Station or the Investigating Officer to handover a copy of this order to the victim(s) and explain it to them. 17. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 18. Petition stands allowed in the terms mentioned above. Copy dasti.