Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 606 (HP)

Akhil Rana v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-04-03

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. 1. Applicant Akhil Rana, apprehending his arrest, in case FIR No. 21 of 2025, dated 28.01.2025, registered, under Sections 498-A, 354, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) with a prayer to direct the Police/ Investigating Officer of Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case. He has termed the entire allegations, which have been levelled, in the FIR, against him, as false. 3. Apart from this, the applicant has given the history of litigation, which have taken place between him and the complainant, who had lodged the FIR. 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. Hence, a prayer has been made that the I.O., Police Station Palampur, may kindly be directed to release the applicant on bail, in the event of his arrest. 6. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that one zero FIR from Police Station Dharampur District Mandi, was received in Police Station, Palampur, District Kangra, for registration of FIR. The said FIR was registered on the statement of Pratima Rana, wherein, she has alleged that she was married to Akhil Rana (applicant), on 15.10.2017. The said marriage was stated to be love-cum-arrange marriage: 6.1. The father of the complainant had given dowry/Stridhan, as per his capacity. In this regard, she has enclosed the list of the dowry with the complaint, which is stated to be in possession of the accused persons. The complaint has been moved against the present applicant, as well as, his parents. 6.2. According to the complainant, the parents of the applicant were not satisfied with the marriage and they were expecting more dowry in the marriage, as according to the complainant, her father is working in the Intelligence Department. 6.3. According to the complainant, the accused used to maltreat and taunt her for bringing less dowry. 6.2. According to the complainant, the parents of the applicant were not satisfied with the marriage and they were expecting more dowry in the marriage, as according to the complainant, her father is working in the Intelligence Department. 6.3. According to the complainant, the accused used to maltreat and taunt her for bringing less dowry. The parents of the applicant tried to get rid of the complainant, by saying that they can marry their son (applicant) with another girl. She has alleged that accused Sarabeet Singh also keeps evil eye on her. 6.4. According to the complainant, once she was sleeping in her room, accused Sarabjeet Singh tried to outrage her modesty. When, the complainant resisted, then the said accused proclaimed that it is his right. In this regard, she has made complaint to applicant Akhil Rana, but, he had not paid any heed. Thereafter, accused Sarabjeet Singh also tried to forcibly outrage her modesty, despite screaming, accused Kushma Rana, closed the door. 7. On the basis of the above facts, the complainant has prayed that action be taken against the accused persons. 8. After perusing the said status report, interim protection was granted to the applicant on 03.03.2025. 9. In the status report, which was filed later on, it has been mentioned that the applicant has not joined the investigation. As such, a direction was given to the applicant to join the investigation. 10. In the status report, which has been filed today, it has been mentioned that the investigation has been conducted by visiting the house of the applicant. Parents (co-accused) of the applicant had stated that their son Akhil Rana (applicant) had gone to Singapore, in order to attend a course and will return home on 30.03.2025. 11. It has also been mentioned in the status report that on 31.03.2025, the applicant has joined the investigation. 12. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 13. Heard. 14. In the status reports, which have been filed in this case, there is no iota of evidence that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required by the Police. When, the police has not come forward with the said prayer, then, there is no occasion, for this Court, to decline the relief to the applicant, as claimed, in the application. 15. When, the police has not come forward with the said prayer, then, there is no occasion, for this Court, to decline the relief to the applicant, as claimed, in the application. 15. Even otherwise, the allegations, which have been levelled against the applicant, in the complaint, will be proved, during the trial. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 03.03.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. Therefore, it is ordered that the applicant be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No.21 of 2025, dated 28.01.2025, registered with Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. under Sections 498-A, 354, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the IPC, on his furnishing personal bond, in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. 19. 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; 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. 20. 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. 21. 20. 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. 21. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet will be filed in the Competent Court of Law. 22. 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.