Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 527 (HP)

Tavinder Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-27

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. Applicant-Tavinder, apprehending his arrest, has filed the present bail application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), seeking a direction to the I.O./Police of Police Station Gaggal, District Kangra, forreleasing him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 20 of 2025, dated 10 th February, 2025, registered under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’). 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been named as accused, in the present case. 3. As per the applicant, after registration of the FIR, police has raided his shop and godown three times, but nothing was found there. Petitioner is stated to be a scrap dealer and the numerous individuals used to sell scrap in exchange for money. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that contractor, Piar Singh is related to the main accused Kiran Kumar and on the night of 07.02.2025, said Kiran Kumar and Yashpal, under the influence of alcohol, visited the applicant’s shop. The applicant, who was about to close his shop informed them that they were not in a fit condition to discuss anything. However, in the morning of 08.02.2025, when the applicant came to the shop, he noticed a dustbin, having the nameplate of Gram Panchayat, Gaggal, lying there. He immediately contacted contractor Piar Singh and informed him that his nephews Kiran and Yashpal, had left the dustbin of Panchayat, in his shop and he has returned all the items belonging to Panchayat. 5. All these facts have been highlighted to show that he is innocent person and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. 6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to grant the relief, as claimed in the application. 7. The applicant had also tried his luck, by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, which was dismissed on 15.03.2025. 8. On the basis of the above facts, the applicants have given certain undertaking, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case a direction is issued under Section 482 of the BNSS. 9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made allow the application. 10. 8. On the basis of the above facts, the applicants have given certain undertaking, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case a direction is issued under Section 482 of the BNSS. 9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made allow the application. 10. When put to notice, the police filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 10.02.2025, Bhuvnesh Chadha, Up Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Gaggal, appeared before the police and moved an application that on 10.02.2025, when he had reached Panchayat Ghar, he came to know that articles have been missing from the Hall, work of which, had been allotted to contractor Piar Singh. When the contractor was called, then, he has expressed his suspicion over one Kiran Kumar, who was allegedly working with him. Those articles might have been taken away by him. He has stated that the value of the stolen articles is about Rs.1,15,000/-. He has described the stolen articles as 10 dustbins, along with 45 angle, 5 solar light (battery), 3 gas stove, 5 steel pipes. 11. On the basis of the above facts, the police has registered the FIR in question and the police machinery swung into motion. 12. Initially, the investigation was conducted by SI Kuldeep Singh, who had visited the spot and prepared the spot map. Statements of witnesses, under Section 180 BNSS, were also recorded. Accused persons were inquired, who, on inquiry, disclosed that in the month of January, 2025, masons were working in the Panchayat Ghar and contract was given to Piar Singh. The key of the said Panchayat Ghar was with Chowkidar Vijay Kumar, whereas, the key of the hall has been handed over to Yashpal. 13. Accused Kiran Kumar and Yashpal disclosed that on seeing the articles, they hatched a conspiracy and committed theft on 21.02.2025. They had sold the iron angles, in the shop of Tavinder Kumar (applicant), for a sum of Rs.7500/-. Thereafter, on 28.01.2025, they had again stolen 5 batteries and 5 steel pipes, and sold the same in the shop of Tavinder Kumar (applicant) for a sum of Rs.7,000/-. On 03.02.2025, Kiran Kumar and Yashpal had stolen gas stove and dustbin and sold the same in the shop of Tavinder Kumar (applicant) for a sum of Rs.3500/-. 14. Consequently, both the accused were arrested on 14.2.2025. On 03.02.2025, Kiran Kumar and Yashpal had stolen gas stove and dustbin and sold the same in the shop of Tavinder Kumar (applicant) for a sum of Rs.3500/-. 14. Consequently, both the accused were arrested on 14.2.2025. Statement of contractor Piar Singh was also recorded, in which, he has deposed that on 8.2.2025, at about 10.00 a.m., when, he was crossing from the shop of Tavinder Kumar (applicant), he noticed a dustbin belonging to Panchayat. On inquiry, he has disclosed that the same were sold to him by Kiran Kumar and Yashpal, upon which, a complaint was made to the Pradhan. Thereafter, he had returned the dustbin to the Panchayat, which was taken into possession on 14.2.2025. 15. Following two cases are stated to have been registered against the applicant, which are pending adjudication, before the competent Court of law:- i) FIR No.119/2020, dated 01.07.2020, registered under Section 457, 380, 411, 34 IPC, with Police Station, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P; and ii) FIR No. 78/2024, dated 10.08.2024, registered under Section 303(2), 3(5), 317(2), of the BNS, with Police Station Gaggal, District Kangra, H.P. 16. It has been apprehended that the applicant is a very clever person and in case, the relief as claimed, in the application, is granted to him, he may again indulge in the same activities. Apart from this, it has been pleaded that the applicant had purchased the dustbins, despite the fact that there was name of Panchayat over them. 17. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 18. After perusing the said status report, interim protection was given to the applicant vide order dated 20.2.2025. 19. Today, the police has filed the supplementary status report, disclosing therein, that the applicant has joined the investigation, but, he is not disclosing the fact as to where he has kept the remaining articles. As such, a prayer has been made for custodial interrogation of the applicant. 20. From the fact that the applicant is not disclosing anything about the remaining articles, the police is not able to make out a case for custodial interrogation. 21. So far as the cases, which have been registered against the applicant, are concerned, in none of the cases, he has not been convicted by the competent Court of law. 20. From the fact that the applicant is not disclosing anything about the remaining articles, the police is not able to make out a case for custodial interrogation. 21. So far as the cases, which have been registered against the applicant, are concerned, in none of the cases, he has not been convicted by the competent Court of law. As such, no adverse inference can be drawn, against him, as presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant. 22. The applicant is permanent resident of District Kangra, as such, it cannot be said that in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for trial. 23. Even otherwise, keeping in view the allegations, according to which, the applicant had returned the dustbins to the Panchayat, this Court is of the view that the police is not able to make out a case for his custodial interrogation. 24. 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. 25. Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 20.03.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute, 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; and 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. 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 application. 27. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet will be filed in the Competent Court of Law. 28. 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 application. 27. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet 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.