Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 341 (HP)

Tej Singh v. State Of H. P.

2021-06-15

ANOOP CHITKARA

body2021
JUDGMENT Anoop Chitkara, J. - A habitual offender, who is again in prison for holding hostage the pump operator, and after locking him, stealing the water pumps, and subsequently selling the metal, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of CrPC, seeking bail. 2. Earlier, the petitioner had filed the following bail petition: (a) Bail application No. 134-D/XXII/2021, titled as Tej Singh Vs. State of HP was filed before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala and the same stood dismissed on 18.5.2021. 3. Para No.11 of the bail petition and status report mentions the following criminal history: a) FIR No. 54/2021 dated 8.4.2021 under Sections 458, 380, 353, 332 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Nadaun in which the accused has been granted bail by the Ld. ACJM, Nadaun, vide order dated 13.5.2021. b) FIR No. 15/2021 dated 26.3.2021 u/s 458, 411, 201 and 34 of IPC in which bail applications have been rejected by the Ld. CJM, Hamirpur on 22.5.2021 and the accused is lodged in Hamirpur jail at present. 4. Briefly, the allegations against the petitioner are that on 9.4.2021 Raman Kumar, Pump Operator, who was posted at Nakki Pump House informed the police about commission of the offence. He stated that in the intervening night of 8/9.4.2021 on resuming his duties, he had switched on two motors at around 9:00 pm. After that he sat on a bed in the adjacent room and bolted it from inside. At around 10:30 pm, some people started forcibly opening the door. On this when he enquired then, in the meantime, they were able to open the door because its bolt lost grip. Subsequently, 5-6 people came inside and showed him a weapon which was similar to knife and another person showed him something which was similar to 'Katta'. Those people were wearing masks. They enquired from him about the copper. Subsequently, they torn the bed sheet and with its help tied him. Thereafter they shutdown the Pump House and carried its motors along with them and threatened him with dire consequences. Based on these allegations, the Police registered the FIR mentioned above. Subsequently during investigation, the Investigator was able to recover some copper and also some iron scrap. 5. Ld. Subsequently, they torn the bed sheet and with its help tied him. Thereafter they shutdown the Pump House and carried its motors along with them and threatened him with dire consequences. Based on these allegations, the Police registered the FIR mentioned above. Subsequently during investigation, the Investigator was able to recover some copper and also some iron scrap. 5. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the incarceration before the proof of guilt would cause grave injustice to the petitioner and family. 6. On the contrary, the State contends that the Police have collected sufficient evidence against the bail petitioner and the co-accused. Another argument on behalf of the State is that the accused is a proven habitual offender. Given his past conduct, the accused is likely to repeat the offense, the crime is heinous, the accused is a risk to law-abiding people, and bail might send a wrong message to society. REASONING: 7. In Sunny Kapoor v State of HP, CrMPM 2168 of 2020, (Para 30 & 31), this Court after considering the relevant judicial precedents observed that in reckoning the number of cases as criminal history, the prosecutions resulting in acquittal or discharge; or when Courts quashed the FIR; the prosecution stands withdrawn, or Prosecution filed a closure report; cannot be included. The criminal history must be of cases where the accused was convicted, including the suspended sentences and all pending First Information Reports, wherein the bail petitioner stands arraigned as an accused. While considering each bail petition of the accused with a criminal history, it throws an onerous responsibility upon the Courts to act judiciously with reasonableness because arbitrariness is the antithesis of law. Although crime is to be despised and not the criminal, yet for a recidivist, the contours of a playing field are marshy, and graver the criminal history, slushier the puddles. 8. As per the status report, the petitioner disrupted the water supply and took away the water pumps. This would have disrupted the water supply for a number of days till the installation of the replacements, which is a time-consuming process. For petty gains, the petitioner deprived a large number of people, their livestock, agriculture from the most basic source of sustenance, i.e., water, the toolbox of our society. 9. The petition refers to various contradictions. This would have disrupted the water supply for a number of days till the installation of the replacements, which is a time-consuming process. For petty gains, the petitioner deprived a large number of people, their livestock, agriculture from the most basic source of sustenance, i.e., water, the toolbox of our society. 9. The petition refers to various contradictions. However, because the investigation is still going on as such these contentions will be gone through after filing of the police report under section 173(2) CrPC. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has also made several other arguments. Still, given that this Court is not inclined to grant bail, on the reasons mentioned above, discussion of the same will be an exercise in futility. Any detailed analysis of the evidence may prejudice the case of the prosecution or the accused. 10. Given above, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, at this stage, the petitioner fails to make out a case for bail. The petition is dismissed with liberty to file a new bail application. 11. 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. 12. Given above, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the petition is dismissed with liberty reserved to file fresh, either before Trial Court, Sessions Court or this Court, after the filing of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC.