Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1071 (HP)

Devender Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-05-20

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. 1. Applicant Devender Singh, by surrendering himself to the custody of the Court, on 10.4.2025, has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) for releasing him on bail, in case FIR No.25 of 2025, dated 02.04.2025, registered, under Sections 75, 126(2), 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’), Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the POCSO Act) and Section 3(1),(i)(ii) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the SC ST Act) with Police Station Renukaji, District Sirmaur, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case, as, he has nothing to do with the allegations, which have been levelled in the FIR, in question. 3. The applicant has further pleaded that the FIR, which has been lodged against him, is based upon the false facts. 4. On the basis of the above facts, the applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, any direction, under Section 482 of the BNSS is issued by this Court. 5. According to the applicant, he is permanent resident of the address, as mentioned in the application, as such, he is having deep roots in the society. 6. As per the applicant, FIR No.14/2025, dated 19.02.2025, registered, under Section 75, 76, 351(2) of the BNS, Section 12 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(1) of SC ST Act, with Police Station, Renukaji, District Sirmaur, was also lodged by the father of the complainant, against the applicant, in which, bail has been ordered by this Court. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that the child victim appeared before the Police, along with her parents, and submitted a complaint, mentioning therein, that on 13 th March, she had gone to appear in the examination in the School. 8.1. 8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that the child victim appeared before the Police, along with her parents, and submitted a complaint, mentioning therein, that on 13 th March, she had gone to appear in the examination in the School. 8.1. After appearing in the examination, when she was on her way to home, then, near Biari Nala, ahead 3-4 curves from Ekant Guest House, Devender Thakur (applicant) met her and caught hold of the child victim from her arm and insisted her to sit on his bike. When, the child victim refused to sit on the bike, then, she uttered that her sister could not cause any harm to him and now he will see her. He has further uttered that no one can cause harm to him. 8.2. It is her further case that for the last six months, the applicant is doing similar activities and insists her to meet him all alone. 8.3. In addition to this, applicant allegedly threatened her not to disclose this fact to anyone, otherwise, he will not spare anyone. On the basis of the above facts, she has apprehended that some untoward incident may not happen with her. 8.4. It has also been mentioned, in the status report, that initially the FIR was registered under Sections 75, 126(2), 351(2) of the BNS and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. 8.5. The child victim was produced before the Medical Officer at Civil Hospital, Dadahu, from where, her medico-legal certificate was obtained. 8.6. The child victim, thereafter, got recorded her statement, under Section 180 of the BNSS, wherein, she has mentioned that she is student of Government Girls High School, ‘X’ and on 13.3.2025, after appearing in the examination, she was on the way to her home and reached at Bairi, where Devender Thakur (applicant) met her, who was on her bike. He caught hold of her arm and insisted her to sit on the bike. 8.7. Reiterating her earlier stand, she has alleged that the girls belonging to Scheduled Caste, are meant for this purpose only. On the basis of the above facts, the police added Section 3(i)(w)(i)(ii) of the SC/ST Act and thereafter, the child victim was produced before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nahan, where her statement under Section 183 of BNSS was recorded. 9. On the basis of the above facts, the police added Section 3(i)(w)(i)(ii) of the SC/ST Act and thereafter, the child victim was produced before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nahan, where her statement under Section 183 of BNSS was recorded. 9. After perusing the status report, interim protection was given to the applicant, by releasing him on interim bail. 10. On 6.5.2025, the child victim appeared through her counsel and the Police filed the status report, according to which, the documents pertaining to the date of birth of the child victim were procured. 11. During investigation, on 8.4.2025, Secretary Gram Panchayat, as well as, Headmaster of the School, were requested to provide date of birth certificate of the child victim. Thereafter, Tehsildar was also requested to provide the caste certificate of the child victim, as well as, the applicant. 12. On 10.4.2025, as per the documents provided by the Headmaster of the school, the date of birth of the child victim was found to be 4.12.2009. As per the report submitted by Tehsildar, applicant Devinder Singh, belongs to Rajput caste, whereas, the child victim belongs to Scheduled Caste. 13. It has also been mentioned that on the statement of elder sister of the child victim, FIR No.14/2025, dated 19.02.2025, under Sections 75, 76, 351(2) of the BNS, Section 12 POCSO Act and Section 3(1),(i)(ii) of the SC St Act, was registered and the charge-sheet in the same was filed in the competent Court of law. 14. On 14.5.2025, the complainant has also filed objections, reiterating the averments as made in the application, upon which, the FIR, in question, has been registered. Highlighting the fact that similar FIR has also been registered against the applicant, the complainant has vehemently prayed that the present application may kindly be dismissed. 15. The State has also filed the status report reiterating the above facts that the investigation is going on. It has been prayed that the complainant party has allegedly been threatened by the applicant and they are living in the fear that some untoward incident may happen with them. 16. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 17. The investigation, in the present case, although is stated to be going on, but, the police is not able to make out a case for custodial interrogation. 16. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 17. The investigation, in the present case, although is stated to be going on, but, the police is not able to make out a case for custodial interrogation. Even otherwise, the allegations, which have been levelled against the applicant, in the complaint, will be proved, during the trial. 18. The application cannot be rejected as a matter of punishment, as pre-trial punishment, is prohibited under the law. In such situation, rejection of the application would be nothing, but, to punish the applicant prior to the commencement and conclusion of trial. 19. So far as the registration of the FIR, at the instance of the sister of the complainant is concerned, admittedly, in the said case, no conviction has been inflicted upon the applicant by the competent court of law. As such, on the basis of the registration of the case that too, under the same provisions, is too short to take away the benefit of bail, for which the applicant, otherwise, is entitled to. 20. So far as the apprehensions with regard to the alleged threatening are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case the interim order dated 10.04.2025, is made absolute. 21. The applicant is permanent resident of District Sirmaur, as such, it cannot be said that in case he is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for trial. 22. Considering the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the view that the interim protection, granted to the applicant, is required to be made absolute, as, no useful purpose would be served by dismissing the present application, which would result into the judicial custody of the applicant. 23. Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 10.04.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. 23. Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 10.04.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions : a) That the applicant will join the investigation of the case, as and when, called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law; b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court; c) That the applicant will 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 the Investigating Officer or the Court; d) That the applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application. 24. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present application. 25. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet will be filed in the Competent Court of Law. 26. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found violated by the applicant.