Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 879 (HP)

Ravi Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-12-08

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 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 139 of 2018, dated 26.11.2018, under Sections 302 and 201 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, registered in Police Station Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. 3. 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. 4. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 20.11.2018 police were informed that one kilometer ahead of Judda, a car met with an accident and the same has caught fire. Consequent upon the information, a police team visited the spot and recorded the statement of one Shri Surinder Singh Pal under Section 154 Cr.P.C. He stated that at about 01:00 p.m., after participating in a Jaagran (religious ceremony), he alongwith others started in a taxi to his home. Approximately 1-2 kilometers from Navodaya School, Nahan, towards Paonta, they saw a Swift car, having registration No. PB65W-3372, ablaze and the same had struck a parapet. Driver of the car was burnt inside the car. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and scientific samples were sent for forensic analysis. Police found a half burnt bank passbook, which was in the name of one Aakash Kumar and upon interrogation and investigation it was unearthed that the deceased was a Property Dealer, operating in the area of Dehradun. As the corpse was completely burnt, so it could not be recognized, but as the vehicle in question was used to be only driven by Aakash Kumar, so prima facie it was found that he died in an accident. During the analysis of call records of Aakash Kumar, it was found that on the date of accident he was in constant touch with Ravi Kumar (petitioner herein), his real nephew. During the analysis of call records of Aakash Kumar, it was found that on the date of accident he was in constant touch with Ravi Kumar (petitioner herein), his real nephew. On suspicion, police thoroughly examined the CCTV footage of the cameras installed at Dosadka and it was found that on 19.l1.2018, at 09:05 p.m., a Santro Car, having registration No. HR-03H-3504 was following the car of Aakash Kumar and both the vehicles came from Kala Amb and went to Nahan and at 09:55 p.m. the same Santro car was following the vehicle of Aakash Kumar and both the cars came from Nahan and went towards Paonta Sahib. So, the police suspected some connection of the above Santro car with the accident. Police checked the CCTV footage of the camera installed at a Petrol Pump and found that from the vehicle of Aakash Kumar two people alighted, they talked with each other, thus it was unearthed that on the day of accident Aakash Kumar was not alone. The petitioner was interrogated and he disclosed that the Aakash Kumar has not died in the accident, but he did not disclose as to who has died in the accident. However, on 03.12.2018 the petitioner disclosed that he and his uncle Aakash Kumar took loan from private financers and they could not repay the same. They were being pressurized by the financers, so they planned an accident and wanted to portray death of Aakash Kumar, to get the insurance amount and also to escape from their loan liability. He further disclosed that on the date of accident they highly inebriated one Raju mason and smothered him to death. Thereafter, they set the vehicle ablaze and neutral, so as to portray the murder of the deceased as accident and fled away from the spot in the Santro car. Upon the investigation and interrogation, the offence was found to be under Sections 302 and 201 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. Thereafter, the police seized the above Santro car alongwith its documents and key. The petitioner disclosed that Aakash Kumar is hiding somewhere in Delhi and he was arrested from Delhi. Co-accused Aakash Kumar, during the course of interrogation, also admitted the story, as narrated by the petitioner, to be correct. Thereafter, the police made the relevant recoveries at the instance of the petitioner and completed the codal formalities. The petitioner disclosed that Aakash Kumar is hiding somewhere in Delhi and he was arrested from Delhi. Co-accused Aakash Kumar, during the course of interrogation, also admitted the story, as narrated by the petitioner, to be correct. Thereafter, the police made the relevant recoveries at the instance of the petitioner and completed the codal formalities. It has come in the police investigation that the petitioner and his uncle, co-accused Aakash Kumar, for business purposes used to take loan from private financers and Aakash Kumar has loan liability of 25 to 30 lac, whereas, the petitioner has loan liability of 5-6 lac. The petitioner and the co-accused were trying to get rid of their loans, so they planned the accident and wanted to portray the death of co-accused Aakash Kumar in that accident. Initially both of them tried to manage a corpse to portray the dead body of Aakash Kumar, but when they failed, they killed one Raju and put his corpse on the driver seat and ultimately set the car ablaze with an intent to show that co-accused Aakash Kumar has died in a car accident. The petitioner and co-accused also had an intention to get insurance amount, upon the fake death of Aakash Kumar. The DNA analysis report reveals that the deceased was the biological son of Smt. Harbaiji and thus the deceased was identified as Raju son of late Shri Chokriya, aged 40 years, resident of District Dhaulpur, Rajasthan. After completion of investigation, on 20.02.2019 police presented the challan in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a heinous crime and he played an active role in killing an innocent person. In case the petitioner, at this stage, is enlarged on bail, there is possibility that he may flee from justice, as he is resident of Punjab, or tamper with the prosecution witnesses, so the bail application may be dismissed. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State and gone through the records, 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 neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. 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 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, especially when investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court, nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner and considering the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has further argued that the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, so the bail application may be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in commission of heinous crime. He has further argued that the petitioner is resident of Punjab and thus in a position to flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution evidence. He has argued that considering the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed by the petitioner and the co-accused and also the fact that they murdered an innocent person in a brutal way, the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 7. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last approximately two years and he cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete, now nothing remains to be recovered at his instance and the challan also stands presented in the learned Trial Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 8. 8. At this stage, considering the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed by the petitioner and the co-accused, the fact that the petitioner is resident of Punjab and in case, at this stage, enlarged on bail, may flee from justice, considering the role of the petitioner in the alleged offence, the heinousness of the offence, the fact that the trial is in its initial stage and the petitioner in case enlarged on bail, may tamper with the prosecutrix evidence, and considering all other vital aspects, which emerge from the records, and without discussing the same elaborately at this stage, this Court is of the opinion that the present is not a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. 9. In view of the foregoing discussions, the petition, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. 10. Needless to say that the observations made hereinabove are only confined for the adjudication of the instant petition and shall have no bearing, whatsoever, on the merits of the main case, which shall be adjudicated on its own.