Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 177 (HP)

Sheela Devi v. State of H. P.

2025-01-21

BIPIN CHANDER NEGI

body2025
JUDGMENT : Bipin Chander Negi, J. The present bail petition has been filed under Section482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, in FIR No.34 of 2024, dated 14.12.2024, registered at Women Police Station, Nahan District Sirmaur H.P., under Sections 363, 366A, 354, 376 and 34 IPC and Sections 06, 17 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). 2. Status report filed, the same is taken on record. Copy whereof supplied to learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status report and the record. 4. The victim/complainant in the case at hand is aged 17 years. On the death of her father, the mother of the victim had left the victim and her two other siblings to fend for themselves. The elder brother of the victim one Pankaj lives at Kala Amb. The elder sister of the victim is married at Kala Amb. 5. After the death of the father of the victim, the victim was being looked after by the elder sister of the late father of the victim. The aforesaid lady who was taking care of the victim as per the complainant was a habitual drinker. As a consequence of drinking habits about two years ago, the said lady had shunted the victim out of her house. 6. It is thereafter that the victim had gone to the house of Sheela Devi/bail petitioner, whom she had all along addressed as her maternal aunt. After having stayed there for two days, the bail petitioner/Sheela Devi had called her daughter Preeto Devi. 7. Preeto Devi was accompanied by her husband Ashok Kumar and her two sons Raj Kumar and Ram Kumar. At the house of the bail petitioner, the victim, who was a minor was handed over to Preeto Devi and her family. The bail petitioner had told the victim that she would henceforth live in the house of Preeto Devi like her daughter-in-law as Preeto Devi’s son Ram Kumar in an informal ceremony at the bail petitioner’s house had allegedly got married to the victim. 8. Thereafter, the victim was taken to Preeto Devi’s house at Sarwana (Barwala) in Haryana. At the residence of Preeto Devi, as per the victim for about last two years, Ram Kumar had been indulging in wrongful sexual acts with the victim. 8. Thereafter, the victim was taken to Preeto Devi’s house at Sarwana (Barwala) in Haryana. At the residence of Preeto Devi, as per the victim for about last two years, Ram Kumar had been indulging in wrongful sexual acts with the victim. Even Ashok Kumar the husband of Preeto Devi is stated to have made sexual overtures/advances towards the victim. Feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid, the bail petitioner had left the house of Preeto Devi and come back to her maternal aunt’s house. Herein the paternal aunt had refused to keep the victim as according to the paternal aunt, the victim had now got married and hence she was now expected to reside in her marital home. 9. Upon being turned out from the house of the paternal aunt, she proceeded towards the Panchkula Court. Enroute while travelling in a bus, the conductor of the bus dropped the victim at the Mahila Police Station at Narayangarh. The Child Welfare Committee (CWC) Narayangarh kept the victim for two months at a Bal Ashram. Upon determining her antecedents, she was shifted to Nahan. At Nahan, the concerned CWC on 13.12.2024 brought the victim to the concerned Mahila Police Station, thereupon the present compliant was lodged against all concerned. 10. In the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances, the present petitioner had approached this Court. Vide order dated 06.01.2025, interim protection had been granted to the bail petitioner. As per the status report filed, the bail petitioner is regularly participating in investigation. No recoveries have to be instituted from the bail petitioner. There is no requirement of any custodial interrogation insofar as the present bail petitioner is concerned. 11. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. 12. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. 13. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of his family. 14. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. 13. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of his family. 14. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status report qua the social circumstances of the petitioner whereby it can be made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the confidence that the Court may place in him to turn out to take justice at the hands of the Court. 15 Petitioner is permanent resident of village Sainwala, Mubarikpur, PO Sainwala and Tehsil Paonta Sahib District Sirmaur, PO Sainwala and Teshil Paonta Sahib District Sirmaur H.P. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension regarding her fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the trial. In any case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 16. Hence, after going through the material available on record and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and interim order dated 06.01.2025 is confirmed. This bail order is subject, however, to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner will appear before the Court and the Investigating Officer whenever required ; (ii) that he 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 any facts to the Court or the police; (iii) that he will not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor he will try to win over the Prosecution witnesses or terrorise them in any manner; (iv) that he will not deliberately and intentionally act in a manner which may tend to delay the investigation or the trial of the case; (v) that he will not leave India without prior permission of the Court; & (vi) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, Email, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any. 17. Needless to say that investigating agency shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the petitioner. 18. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any observations made therein. 19. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any.