Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 858 (HP)

Suraj Rana v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-11-26

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The present bail applications have been maintained by the petitioners, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking their release in case FIR No. 216 of 2020, dated 30.07.2020, under Sections 376(D), 452, 506 and 201 of the Indian Penal, registered at Police Station Bhuntar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh 2. As per the averments made in the petitions, the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, they are permanent 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 keeping them behind the bars for an unlimited period, so they be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. The prosecution story, as emerges from the records, is that on 30.07.2020, the prosecutrix (name withheld) has filed a complaint before the police concerned, wherein she alleged that on 28.07.2020, at 7:00 p.m., she noticed 3-4 boys outside her house, who were listening music in the car at high volume. When the prosecutrix came out of her house, they attacked her, took her inside her house and forcibly raped her. After committing rape upon the prosecutrix, the accused persons also threatened her to do away with her life. On the subsequent day, the prosecutrix, being scared of such incident, remained inside her house, however, around 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. the accused persons alongwith 10-12 boys, again came to the house of the prosecutrix and threatened her and her family with dire consequences, upon which, she assured them that she would not file any complaint against them. Even after assuring the accused persons, she started receiving threatening calls from them. Consequently, FIR No. 216 of 2020, dated 30.07.2020, under Sections 376(D), 452, 506 and 201 of the Indian Penal came to be registered against the accused persons. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners be dismissed, as the petitioners were found involved in a serious offence, and there is possibility that in case at this stage they are enlarged on bail, they may flee from justice and tamper with the prosecution evidence. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report(s), carefully. 5. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report(s), carefully. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as they are permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars for an unlimited period. On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the petitioners have committed a heinous crime and in case, they are enlarged on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so the bail applications of the petitioners be dismissed 6. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioners and that of the prosecutrix, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, the fact that the petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as they are permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh, the fact that the investigation is almost complete and the challan stands presented in the learned trial Court, the fact that the petitioners are behind the bars and cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period and also considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing them elaborately at this stage, the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail is required to be exercised in their favour. Consequently, the petitioners, who have been arrested by the police in case FIR No 216 of 2020, dated 30.07.2020, under Sections 376(D), 452, 506 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, are ordered to be forthwith released on bail, in this case, subject to their furnishing personal bonds to the tune of 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) each, with one surety in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: i. That the petitioners will join investigation of case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law and will appear before the Court. ii. That the petitioners will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. iii. That the petitioners 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 petitions are disposed of. Copy dasti.