Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 747 (HP)

Abhishek Thakur v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-10-16

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The matter is taken up through video conference. 2. 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.32 of 2020, dated 14.05.2020, under Sections 67, 67A of the Information & Technology Act and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh 3. 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 District Hamirpur, 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 sending him behind the bars, so he be released on bail. 4. Police report stands filed. The prosecution story, as emanates from the records, is that on 14.05.2020, the complainant (name withheld) sent a letter to the police through post, wherein it has been stated that Abhishek (petitioner herein) has misused her photos in other fake accounts, in the name of Shruti Verma and Shakshi Sood and he added caption "girl is available for one night" and also mentioned price. By this act of the petitioner, complainant has been harassed for the last four years due to which she could not focus on work. She also filed complaints against the petitioner in the Cyber Cell Chandigarh and now, complainant has come back from Chandigarh to Shimla and have again been harassed by the petitioner. On the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant has been recorded on 15.05.2020. Thereafter, the police proceeded with completing the codal formalities and a case was registered against the petitioner under the apt Sections of the I.T. Act. As per police, on 20.08.2020, 21st , 24th and 28th August , 2020 the petitioner and complainant had conversation with each other, on her mobile phone and stated that the petitioner had given ill-treatment to her. As per the police, the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as, in case the petitioner at this stage, is enlarged on bail, he may temper with the prosecution evidence and flee from justice. 5. As per the police, the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as, in case the petitioner at this stage, is enlarged on bail, he may temper with the prosecution evidence and flee from justice. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the records, including the police report, carefully. 6. 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 resident of District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has argued that the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation and no fruitful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed a serious crime and in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed. 7. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence as he is permanent resident of District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh His custodial interrogation is not at all required by the police, as he is joining and co-operating in the investigation, so the petition may be allowed and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 8. At this stage, after considering the different facets of the case in hand and after giving thoughtful and incisive consideration to the facts that the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation, he is not in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as he is permanent resident of District Hamirpur, H.P., his custody is not at all required by the police for interrogation, the fact, that nothing has come out against the petitioner in the police investigation, considering the fact that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case granted. Considering the nature of the offence and the manner in which the same is alleged to have been committed 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 FIR No.32 of 2020, dated 14.05.2020, under Sections 67, 67A of the Information & Technology Act and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) 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 made 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. 9. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. Copy dasti.