ORDER : Petitioner has approached this Court seeking bail under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’), in case FIR No.36 of 2020, dated 09.09.2020, registered in Women Police Station Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., under Sections 498-A, 323, 494, 495, 418, 505 506 of Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC”) and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SC&ST Act’). 2. Status report stands filed. Record was also made available. 3. Prosecution case is that on 9.9.2020, complainant Archana Devi submitted an application to HC Pawan Kumar on the basis of which FIR was registered against the petitioner for mental cruelty and harassment and physical exploitation with threat to kill the complainant. As per complaint, marriage of complainant was solemnized with petitioner on 10.5.2017 in a temple of Mata Awahdevi, District Hamirpur according to Hindu Rites and Rituals, while petitioner was posted in ITBP Camp Babeli, District Kullu HP. 4. During election of Bhoranj Legislature Constituent Assembly, petitioner was posted on elections duty in that area. During that time, on 9.4.2017 he came in contact of real aunt (tai) of complainant to whom petitioner disclosed that he was not having any brother, sister or anybody else in his family and he was orphan and was interested to settle in Himachal Pradesh because of his too much liking for Himachal Praesh and, thus, he expressed his desire to purchase land for settling in Himachal after marrying some good girl. Aunt of complainant, after having talks with parents of complainant, settled the engagement of petitioner and complainant and, thereafter, their marriage was solemnized on 10.5.2017. As per complaint, parents of complainant gifted ornaments to her and her husband of value about Rs. 7 lacs. But no dowry was given and, therefore, her husband started harassing her for dowry and took into possession all ornaments and threatened to spoil life of complainant after breaking her ‘Mangal Sutra’. Petitioner also threatened the complainant of serious consequences on disclosure about it to her relatives or parents and he also broke her mobile phone. 5. Further that, at the time of marriage, complainant was serving as a Nurse in a private hospital at Ambala after completing her B.Sc Nursing Course, but she left the job on request of her husband (petitioner) with his assurance to help to complete her Master’s degree. 5. Further that, at the time of marriage, complainant was serving as a Nurse in a private hospital at Ambala after completing her B.Sc Nursing Course, but she left the job on request of her husband (petitioner) with his assurance to help to complete her Master’s degree. But instead, petitioner kept the complainant as a servant and after some days of marriage, expressed that he did not have any interest in producing child and, therefore, asked the complainant not to dream for that. Petitioner did not enter the name of complainant in his Gram Panchayat. 6. Later on, complainant came to know that petitioner was already married with one lady Haripriya who was also serving in ITBP and petitioner was father of two children. On inquiring about it, petitioner beat the complainant like animals with Army shoes and thereafter started to beat, harass and tease her continuously and also tried to burn her by sprinkling oil on her and continued to threaten to burn her alive by opening valve of domestic gas cylinder. 7. As per complaint, petitioner also tried to destroy her all identity proofs including ATM Card, PAN Card and Aadhar Card etc. and he used to call her by caste with comments that she belonged to a lower caste. 8. As per complaint, after knowing about petitioner’s earlier marriage, complainant refused to continue physical relations with him, but against her wishes, petitioner violated her so many times. It has also been complained that despite having salary more than Rs.50,000/- per month, petitioner was not giving even a single penny to complainant and on complaining about this to ITBP Officer and serving a notice through Advocate, petitioner started beating, harassing the complainant more brutally with threats to kill her. 9. Being fed up from aforesaid circumstances, somehow, managed to escape and reach her parental house on 30.7.2020 and as she came from Red Zone, she remained as home quarantine for 28 days and thereafter, she made the complaint to police. 10. During investigation, solemnization of marriage of petitioner with complainant was verified. As per status report, FIR was registered on 9.9.2020 and at that time, COVID pandemic was at its peak throughout India and there were restrictions on traveling and, therefore, investigation was conducted through correspondence. 10. During investigation, solemnization of marriage of petitioner with complainant was verified. As per status report, FIR was registered on 9.9.2020 and at that time, COVID pandemic was at its peak throughout India and there were restrictions on traveling and, therefore, investigation was conducted through correspondence. Further that on 16.9.2021, through DIG RTC Shiv Gangai ITBPOP Tamilnadu, petitioner was asked to join the investigation and in response thereto, DIG vide letter dated 18.10.2021, informed that before registration of FIR, complainant had issued a legal notice through Advocate and on receiving the said notice, for solemnizing the second marriage during existence of earlier marriage, show cause notice was issued to petitioner on 3.7.2021 and for not replying the same, petitioner was removed from service on 14.8.2021. After receiving this information, a team headed by DySP went to Tamilnadu on 22.12.2021 for obtaining the record and during that, they came to know that petitioner was staying in his native place in Kerala whereupon petitioner was searched with the help of local police and on 30.12.2021, he was associated in the investigation and finding proof for commission of offence, as reported in FIR, he was arrested and produced in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-III, Hamirpur on 31.12.2021. Since then he is in judicial custody in Sub Jail, Hamirpur. 11. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that petitioner is permanent resident of India in the State of Kerala and he was not having any intention to cheat the complainant as he was not having good relations with his first wife and for that reason, his first wife had filed a case for divorce in the Family Court, Chawda on 26.12.2015 wherein petitioner and Haripriya vide mutual agreement dated 23.9.2017 had agreed to dissolve their first marriage and judgment in that case was passed by Family Court on 27.09.2017 whereas petitioner solemnized marriage with complainant on 10.5.2017 after filing of divorce petition for dissolution of his first marriage but before final order passed by Family Court. 12. It has been stated in status report that complainant and petitioner after solemnizing the marriage in Himachal Pradesh, stayed together in Kerala and Tamilnadu as husband and wife and during that period, complainant was harassed, threatened and subjected to cruelty. 13. 12. It has been stated in status report that complainant and petitioner after solemnizing the marriage in Himachal Pradesh, stayed together in Kerala and Tamilnadu as husband and wife and during that period, complainant was harassed, threatened and subjected to cruelty. 13. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that keeping in view the nature of offence involvement in present case wherein guilt of petitioner is yet to be established and proved by prosecution during trial, for protecting the personal liberty of petitioner, the general rule that ‘bail is rule and jail is an exception’ is attracted. Further that investigation is complete and on the basis of challan presented in Court trial is going on which is at the stage of recording of prosecution evidence. Further that petitioner is also ready to furnish local surety for assuring his presence in the Court during trial. 14. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting upon merits of case, and also taking note of the factors and parameters, required to be considered at the time of adjudication of bail application, as propounded in various pronouncements of the Courts, including Supreme Court petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 15. Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail, at this stage, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount, one of which, as undertaken, shall be local surety to the satisfaction of trial Court within a period of two weeks from today and also subject to any further conditions to be imposed by trial Court for ensuring his presence during trial including the following further conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall make himself available during further investigation as well as trial on each and every date as and when required; (ii) That the petitioner shall 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 Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses; (iii) That the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation as well as trial; (iv) That the petitioner shall not jump over the bail and shall inform, in writing, regarding change of address, land line number and/or mobile number, if any, in advance, to concerned Police Station; (v) That the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected or the commission of which he is suspected; (vi) In the event of repetition of commission of offence, bail granted in present case shall be liable to be cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution/police; (vii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of Court; (viii) That petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner. 16. It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing any such other or further condition on the petitioner as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. It will also be open to the trial Court/Magistrate to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice. 17. In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 18. Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.3.2013. 19. Any observation made in this order shall not affect the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the disposal of this bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. 20. The petitioner is permitted to produce copy of order downloaded from the High Court website and the trial Court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however, passing of order may be verified from the High Court website or otherwise. Petition stands disposed of.