Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 440 (JK)

Koushal Kumar v. Union Territory of J&K

2021-08-27

RAJNESH OSWAL

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of bail in challan titled UT of J&K Vs. Koushal Kumar arising out of F.I.R bearing No. 63/2020 dated 14.03.2020 under Section 306 IPC registered at Police Station, Samba, after the application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Samba vide order dated 31.05.2021. 2. It is stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and was arrested on 19.08.2020 and ever since then, he is in custody. Further, that the petitioner is young boy of 22 years old and pursuing diploma in Civil Engineering in Government Polytechnic College, Jammu and at present is in 5th Semester. 3. The response stands filed in which besides narrating factual aspects it has been stated that the petitioner is involved in heinous and serious offence and as such, he is not entitled to bail. 4. Mr. Ravinder Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in a case particularly, when inquest proceedings remained pending for nearly six months and thereafter, F.I.R was registered on the basis of the manipulated statements. He further submits that he petitioner is a young boy of 22 years of age and because of his continuous detention in the custody, his educational career is in jeopardy. 5. Per contra, Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, learned GA vehemently submits that the petitioner is guilty of committing heinous offence, so he is not entitled to bail and he further submits that there is every apprehension of threat to the complainant as well as the witnesses. 6. Heard and perused the record. 7. Perusal of record reveals that on 20.09.2019, an information was received from PCR Samba that one girl namely Diksha Chowdhary (Age-19 years), D/o Vinay Kumar Chowdhary, R/o Vijaypur District Samba studying in Government Degree College, Samba has died due to consumption of some poisonous substance and therefore, on the receipt of the said information, the inquest proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were initiated and during enquiry, phone call details of the deceased were obtained and from the statement of witnesses under Section 175 Cr.P.C., it was found that Koushal Kumar S/o Sh. Kuldeep Raj, R/o Chang, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Samba used to harass/disturb the deceased by making phone calls and by sending messages to the deceased and used to compel her for marriage. Two days before 20.09.2019, the petitioner had gone to the house of the deceased and started harassing her and because of this harassment, she consumed poisonous substance on 20.09.2019. It is further evident that after completion of the proceedings, the F.I.R bearing No. 63/2020 under Section 306 IPC was registered and it was found that Koushal Kumar S/o Kuldeep Raj, R/o Chang Tehsil Ramgarh District Samba was regularly harassing the deceased by making phone calls/messages and two days prior to the incident, he had even gone to the house of the deceased due to which deceased consumed poison at her home. 8. From the record, it is evident that the challan has been filed against the petitioner and there are allegations against the petitioner that he used to harass the deceased continuously due to which, she committed suicide and further two days prior to the incident, the petitioner had even visited the residence of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than one year and the completion of the trial may take some time. The allegations against the petitioner are no doubt serious but they are required to be proved during the course of the trial. The presence of the petitioner is required only for trial. 9. Needless to say that the bail is a rule and jail is an exception. The petitioner is a young student of 22 years of age, undergoing diploma in Civil Engineering in Government Polytechnic, College, Jammu and the respondent has not brought anything on record to demonstrate that he is having past criminal antecedents. The petitioner is in custody for the last one year and further taking into consideration that the continuous detention of the petitioner shall destroy the whole career of the petitioner, this Court deems it proper to release the petitioner on bail. Further the apprehension of the respondent that the petitioner may threaten the complainant and the witnesses can be taken care of by imposing the appropriate conditions. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to following conditions:- (i) subject to furnishing of bail bond and personal bond to the tune of Rs. Further the apprehension of the respondent that the petitioner may threaten the complainant and the witnesses can be taken care of by imposing the appropriate conditions. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to following conditions:- (i) subject to furnishing of bail bond and personal bond to the tune of Rs. 1 lac to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. (ii) he shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of this Court without permission of the Investigating Officer. (iii) he shall not contact/visit the complainant or the witnesses either physically or through any other mode. (iv) in the event of violation of any condition mentioned above, respondent can lay a motion for cancellation of bail before this Court. 10. In view of this, the present application is disposed of.