Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 467 (HP)

Suraj Thakur v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-24

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : (Virender Singh, J.) Apprehending his arrest, in case FIR No.04 of 2025 dated 19.01.2025, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in issue’), registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109, 324(4), 238 and 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station Ramshehar, District Solan, H.P., the applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’). 2. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the I.O/police of Police Station Ramshehar, to release him, on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case/FIR. 3. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated, in this case, on the distorted facts. No incident, according to him, had allegedly taken place, at any point of time. 4. As per applicant, Section 109 of BNS is stated to have been added by the investigating agency, just to curtail the liberty to the applicant. 5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 19.02.2025. 6. It is the case of the applicant that apart from the present case, there are two other cases, registered against him, out of which, FIR No.54/2011, registered under Sections 341, 323, 34 of IPC, with Police Station Ramshehar, was compromised, before the Gram Panchayat, Ramshehar and the other FIR No.42/2019, registered under Sections 355, 323, 341, 504 and 506 of IPC, with Police Station Ramshehar, is pending adjudication, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nalagarh. 7. On the basis of above facts, certain undertakings have been given, on behalf of applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the police/I.O., in this case. 8. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 18.01.2025, an intimation was received in the Police Station and thereafter, the Investigating Officer, in order to ascertain the said information, had reached at the spot, where, Harish Kumar (complainant) was found in injured condition. He was sent to hospital for his medico legal examination. 9. He was sent to hospital for his medico legal examination. 9. It is the case of the police that when, the doctor declared the complainant fit for making statement, he has made the statement, disclosing therein that he is a transporter by profession. On 18.01.2025, he had gone to Nalagarh in connection with his work. On the evening of the same day, he was returning back on his motorcycle, bearing registration No.HP12-B-1179. At about 09:00 pm, when, he reached near Shivalik Public School, then, from the opposite side, a black coloured Thar, being driven by its driver, came there and its driver intentionally hit the motorcycle with his Thar. Consequently, the complainant fell down. Thereafter, driver Suraj (applicant) alighted down from the Thar and attacked upon the complainant with sharp-edged khukhri (weapon) and has inflicted injuries to the complainant. 10. According to the complainant, two injuries were inflicted on the right leg and one injury was inflicted on the left leg. On screaming, applicant, after abusing and threatening to finish him, had left the spot, towards Ramshehar in his Thar. On hearing the screaming, Vikram Singh, Sunil Sharma and Satpal Singh reached there, who, with the help of Ambulance, took the injured to Civil Hospital, Nalagarh. As such, he has prayed that the action be taken against the applicant. 11. As per the status report, on 19.01.2025, at the instance of witnesses, spot was visited and spot map was prepared. The damaged motorcycle, bearing registration No.HP12-B-1179, was taken into police possession. The statements of the witnesses were recorded, under Section 180 of BNSS. The CCTV footage of the nearby installed cameras was taken into possession and it was found that at about 08:59 pm (approx.), a black coloured Thar, being driven by its driver, was coming from Ramshehar to Chamdar side. 12. As per the CCTV footage, near New Shivalik Public Senior Secondary School, Ramshehar, at the curve, the said vehicle was stopped and at about 09:06 pm, a motorcycle was found coming from Ramshehar side and the said motorcyclist was hit by the Thar. Thereafter, at about 09:07 pm, the said vehicle again started and was taken away by its driver. In the CCTV footage, it was found that car, bearing registration No.HP72-C-3005, being driven by its driver, was seen going from Nalagarh to Dholi road. 13. Thereafter, at about 09:07 pm, the said vehicle again started and was taken away by its driver. In the CCTV footage, it was found that car, bearing registration No.HP72-C-3005, being driven by its driver, was seen going from Nalagarh to Dholi road. 13. As per further case of the police applicant-Suraj Thakur, in order to kill the injured/complainant, in a planned manner, firstly hit him with the help of his vehicle and subsequently, inflicted the blows with the sharp-edged weapon. As such, Section 109 of BNS has been added, in this case. 14. It is the further case of the police that the applicant had filed the application for anticipatory bail, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. and in pursuance of the direction of the Court, the said vehicle was taken into possession, which the applicant had allegedly used in the crime. The applicant has produced the weapon/knife, which was got identified from the complainant, but, he had not identified the same, being used in the crime. However, on 19.02.2025, the anticipatory bail of the applicant was dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh. 15. It has been mentioned in the status report that in case, the relief is given to the applicant, he may coerce the witnesses or may not be available for the trial. 16. In the status report, which has been filed on 27.02.2025, almost similar stand has been taken, by the police. 17. In the status report, which has been filed today i.e. 24.03.2025, it has been stated that the final opinion of the doctor has been obtained, according to which, the injuries on the person of the complainant were found to be grievous, caused with sharp and blunt weapon. Since, the applicant could not produce the khukhri (weapon), allegedly used in the crime, as such, Section 238 of the BNS has been added, in this case. 18. On the basis of above facts and reiterating the apprehensions, it has been prayed that the present application may be dismissed. 19. Heard. 20. Keeping in view the medical record, as well as, the opinion of the doctor, this Court is of the view that since, the applicant is the permanent resident of Nalagarh and has joined the investigation, as and when, directed by this Court, as such, no useful purpose would be served by dismissing the application. 21. 19. Heard. 20. Keeping in view the medical record, as well as, the opinion of the doctor, this Court is of the view that since, the applicant is the permanent resident of Nalagarh and has joined the investigation, as and when, directed by this Court, as such, no useful purpose would be served by dismissing the application. 21. The case, arising out of FIR No.42 of 2019 dated 03.08.2019, is still pending, as such, presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant. 22. So far as the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, in this case, are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed, upon the applicant, in case, interim order is made absolute. 23. The role of the accused (applicant), in the commission of the alleged crime, will be proved during the course of trial. The accused (applicant) is to be presumed innocent, till the conclusion of the trial and the bail application cannot be rejected as a matter of punishment, as, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law. 24. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the interim protection, granted to the applicant, vide order dated 21.02.2025, is liable to be made absolute. 25. Consequently, interim order dated 21.02.2025 is made absolute, subject to the conditions, as enumerated in para No.8(i) and 8(iii) to 8(xi) of the said order. 26. 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. 27. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when chargesheet will be filed in the competent Court of law. 28. 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.