Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 438 (HP)

Prakash @Tillu v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-22

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Prakash @Tillu has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.08 of 2024, dated 19.02.2024, registered under Sections 376, 354C and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’), with Police Station Sunni, District Shimla, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, at the instance of the complainant. 3. As per applicant, he is in judicial custody for the last 11 months. According to him, he and victim are related to each other and are from same family. The accused, as well as, family of the child victim are also co- sharer in the property, which is jointly owned by both of them in the village. 4. It is the case of the applicant that in order to grab his share out of the said property, the present case has falsely been registered against him. According to him, he is the sole bread-earner of the family. 5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Shimla, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 21.08.2024. 6. Apart from this, Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate, learned counsel for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 8. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 18.02.2024, SI Hem Raj, IO, Police Station Sadar, had gone to DDU, Zonal Hospital, Shimla, to verify the factual position, as mentioned in Rapat No.59 dated 18.02.2024. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 8. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 18.02.2024, SI Hem Raj, IO, Police Station Sadar, had gone to DDU, Zonal Hospital, Shimla, to verify the factual position, as mentioned in Rapat No.59 dated 18.02.2024. When, the said fact was verified, it was found that the crime, as reported in the said rapat, has taken place in the area of Police Station, Sunni, upon which, vide Rapat No.20 dated 18.02.2024, matter was informed to Incharge, Police Station Sunni. Subsequently, Incharge/SHO, Police Station Sunni, along with other police officials, reached DDUZH, Shimla, where, the mother of the child victim got recorded her statement, disclosing that she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the statement. She has studied up to Class V and does farming while staying at home. 9. According to the complainant, her husband expired about 10 years ago and in her family, her elder daughter is 26 years old, younger daughter is 24 years old, younger son is 22 years old, younger daughter is 20 years old and the youngest daughter is 17 years old (child victim). Out of the above children, one daughter is residing with her real sister from her childhood. Her elder daughter is working in a private sector at Shimla for the last two years. The child victim after passing 10+2 in the year 2023 had taken admission in ITI, (name withheld), in Stenography course. She had started residing with her elder sister. 10. It is the case of the complainant that on 18.02.2024, her elder daughter telephonically informed the complainant that the child victim is complaining of pain in her stomach, upon which, the complainant had suggested some home remedies, but, when, no relief was found, then, she had suggested her elder daughter to take her to hospital. When, she was checked by the doctor in DDUZH, Hospital, it was apprised that the child victim is carrying foetus. She had given birth to female child. After delivery, the condition of the child victim was also stated to be not good and she is not in a position to speak. 11. According to the complainant, some unknown person had raped her, due to which, her daughter got pregnant and gave birth to a female child. She had given birth to female child. After delivery, the condition of the child victim was also stated to be not good and she is not in a position to speak. 11. According to the complainant, some unknown person had raped her, due to which, her daughter got pregnant and gave birth to a female child. As such, the police registered a case, under Sections 376, 354, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 12. Thereafter, the child victim was medico legally examined at DDUZH, Shimla and MLC, as well as, the blood samples of the victim and her newborn baby was preserved on the FTA Card for DNA testing. Subsequently, counseling was done upon the child victim. Thereafter, she has made statement, under Section 161 CrPC, before the police and then, she was produced before the Court, where, her statement, under Section 164 CrPC, was recorded. 13. In her statement, she has named Prakash @Tillu (applicant) as the person, who had committed the alleged act with the child victim. Consequently, he was arrested on 04.03.2024. 14. The date of birth of the child victim was found to be 08.04.2006, as per the documents, collected during the investigation. Meaning thereby that on 01.06.2023, she was about 17 years 1 month and 23 days old. 15. As per statement of the witnesses, the accused (applicant) was found to be real cousin brother of the child victim. As such, Section 4 of the POCSO Act was deleted and Section 6 of the POCSO Act has been added. 16. It is the further case of the police that thereafter, the blood samples of the applicant for DNA profiling was also collected and in the DNA report, the applicant was found to be the biological father of the newly born child and child victim was found to be the biological mother of the said child. 17. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet before the learned trial Court, in which, as per the status report, 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined, including the child victim, her mother, her elder sister and her brother and the case was stated to be fixed for 22.02.2025, 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025. 18. 17. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet before the learned trial Court, in which, as per the status report, 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined, including the child victim, her mother, her elder sister and her brother and the case was stated to be fixed for 22.02.2025, 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025. 18. On the basis of above factual position, following apprehensions have been expressed by the police in the status report:- i. The applicant has committed a heinous offence, being the close relative of the child victim and due to the said act, there is lot of resentment in the general public, in case, he is released on bail, his life could be in danger. ii. The applicant is residing in the same village and in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may coerce/threat the child victim. iii. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activity. 19. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 20. The applicant, in the present case, has been named as accused for ravishing the child victim, who, as per the status report, is not a stranger, but his cousin sister and considering this fact, this Court is of the view that while deciding the question of granting the relief to the applicant, in such type of cases, a delicate balance has to be maintained, between the larger interest of the society and individual liberty. 21. So far as the ground, upon which, the applicant is seeking the relief of bail i.e. attempt of the complainant party to grab the property of the applicant, is concerned, in the conservative/tradition-bound society, no mother would even dream to level such type of allegations, which will tarnish the image of the child victim, as well as, the entire family, in the estimation of the society, just to grab the piece of land. 22. Even otherwise, in the DNA report, the applicant is held to be the biological father of the girl child, to whom, the child victim had given birth. 23. 22. Even otherwise, in the DNA report, the applicant is held to be the biological father of the girl child, to whom, the child victim had given birth. 23. In this case, a specific apprehension, which has been put forward by the police that in case, the applicant is released on bail, his life could be in danger, as, there is lot of resentment in the people of the locality, due to his act, for which, he has been arrested, cannot be said to be unfounded, at this stage. 24. Moreover, the FIR in question has been registered on 19.02.2024 and the applicant was arrested on 04.03.2024 and keeping in view the pace of the trial, it cannot be said that there is undue delay in the trial. 25. Furthermore, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, it will give wrong signal to the society that after committing such a heinous offence, the applicant is still moving freely in the society. 26. In view of the discussions, made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that no ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail. 27. Consequently, the present bail application is dismissed. 28. 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 bail application.