Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 276 (HP)

Arjun Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2023-05-18

SATYEN VAIDYA

body2023
JUDGMENT : (Satyen Vaidya, J.) 1. Petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in case FIR No. 03 of 2023, dated 03.01.2023, under Sections 363, 376, 376(2) of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short “POCSO Act”) registered at Police Station, Reckong-Peo, District Kinnaur, H.P. 2. The case was registered on the complaint of the mother of child victim alleging inter alia that on 03.01.2023 the complainant had visited Reckong-Peo in the company of her daughter aged 17 years. At about 4.30 p.m. the daughter of complainant got missing, she had left the company of complainant without disclosing anything. It was further reported that the complainant was under suspicion that some boy had enticed away her daughter. 3. During investigation, the child victim was recovered. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It was also found that the child victim was carrying a pregnancy of more than 21 weeks as on 07.01.2023. It was also found that on previous occasion also, the child victim had joined the company of petitioner and at that time also, a case was registered vide FIR No. 32 of 2022, dated 22.7.2022 under Sections 363, 323, 506 IPC against the petitioner. 4. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner and child victim were having love affair and were intending to marry each other. Petitioner still intends to marry the child victim as and when she attains majority. As per petitioner, he and the child victim had been residing as husband and wife on earlier occasions also. It is further contended that the investigation in the case is complete and the challan has been filed. No fruitful purpose shall be served by prolonging the custody of petitioner for indeterminate period. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the prayer for grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner is accused of having committed a very serious offence. The child victim still is minor and is a vulnerable witness. In case of grant of bail to petitioner at this stage, there is likelihood that petitioner will try to influence material witnesses including the child victim. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully. 7. The child victim still is minor and is a vulnerable witness. In case of grant of bail to petitioner at this stage, there is likelihood that petitioner will try to influence material witnesses including the child victim. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully. 7. It is evident from the material collected during investigation that the child victim had developed intimate relationship with petitioner. On earlier occasion also, the child victim had left the company of her parents and was found with petitioner. Petitioner was booked for offences under Sections 363, 323 and 506 IPC. Still, the victim chose to leave her parents for joining the company with petitioner. Even petitioner, having already suffered a criminal charge against him, had chosen to take the child victim with him. 8. The child victim has been found to have been carrying a pregnancy of more than five months as on 07.01.2023. She had not disclosed this fact to her parents. The child victim had not opted to get the pregnancy aborted either. I have also gone through the statement of child victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. during investigation. 9. The entirety of circumstances does not suggest use of force, deceit or coercion against the child victim by petitioner. Rather, the petitioner is ready and willing to marry the child victim. 10. Though, the offence(s) as alleged against petitioner by no means gets diluted, yet no fruitful purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioner in custody for indeterminate period. The trial is yet to begin and in all probabilities its conclusion is likely to take considerable time. Keeping the petitioner in custody during entire trial may prove counter-productive even for the child victim. The social aspect especially keeping in view the pregnancy carried by the child victim cannot be ignored. 11. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The case in which he is previously involved has also arisen from his relationship with the child victim. Petitioner is permanent resident of VPO Asrang, Tehsil Moorang, District Kinnaur, H.P. and there is no likelihood of his fleeing or absconding. Even otherwise, pre-trial incarceration is not the rule. 12. 11. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The case in which he is previously involved has also arisen from his relationship with the child victim. Petitioner is permanent resident of VPO Asrang, Tehsil Moorang, District Kinnaur, H.P. and there is no likelihood of his fleeing or absconding. Even otherwise, pre-trial incarceration is not the rule. 12. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case registered vide FIR No.03 of 2023, dated 03.01.2023, under Sections 363, 376, 376(2) of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, at Police Station, Reckong-Peo, District Kinnaur, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. This order shall, however, be subject to the following conditions: i) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activity and in the event of breach of this condition, the bail granted to the petitioner in this case, shall automatically be cancelled. ii) That the petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without express leave of Trial Court during the Trial. iii). That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. iv) That the petitioner shall regularly attend the trial of the case before learned Trial Court and shall not cause any delay in its conclusion. 13. Any observation made in this order shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove.