Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 681 (HP)

Virender Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-04-08

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : (Virender Singh, J.) Applicant-Virender Singh has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.61 of 2024, dated 19.05.2024, registered under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’), with Police Station Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case. 3. As per the applicant, he is a law-abiding citizen and had nothing to do with the alleged offence. 4. Highlighting the fact that the present is the first offence, which has been registered against him, it is the case of the applicant that he is not a habitual offender. 5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 28.12.2024. 6. Apart from this, Mr. Ram Kumar and Mr. Munish Dhatwalia, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant, have 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, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 19.05.2024, complainant produced a complaint, before the police, mentioning therein that she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the complaint. The child victim, who is daughter of her sister, had been adopted by the complainant, as, her sister had solemnized marriage with someone else and no one was there to look after the child. 8.1. As per further contents of the complaint, in the year 2022, the child victim was adopted, as per law. The husband of the complainant is working at Mandi. According to the complainant, her husband has developed illicit relations with the child victim. 8.1. As per further contents of the complaint, in the year 2022, the child victim was adopted, as per law. The husband of the complainant is working at Mandi. According to the complainant, her husband has developed illicit relations with the child victim. The said relations were firstly made in the year 2020, then in 2021, 2022 and thereafter, on 15.05.2024 and 16.05.2024, when, the complainant had gone to Churag. 8.2. The child victim disclosed the said facts to the complainant on 18.05.2024, when, the complainant was teaching her about good and bad touch. Then, the child victim has disclosed to her that the applicant, to whom, she referred to as father (papa), used to touch her inappropriately and also used to remove her clothes and put his private part in her mouth. Whenever, the child victim tried to scream, her mouth was gagged by the applicant. 8.3. According to the child victim, such activity was also done, when, she was in Class VI and VII and has also disclosed that the applicant used to click her nude photographs. As such, it has been prayed that the action be taken against the applicant. 9. Consequently, police registered the FIR in question and criminal machinery swung into motion. 10. During investigation, clothes of the child victim, as well as, bed sheets, were taken into police possession. 11. Thereafter, the child victim was taken to Civil Hospital, Karsog, where, her medico legal examination was conducted. Subsequently, her statement, under Section 164 of CrPC, was got recorded by producing her, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karsog. Subsequently, applicant was arrested on 20.05.2024 and was medico legally examined. Physical evidence, so collected by the doctor, was handed over to the police. 12. According to the police, the investigation, of the present case, is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed, before the competent Court of law, on 25.07.2024. The case is now stated to be fixed on 03.04.2025 for prosecution evidence. 13. It is the further case of the police that on 03.04.2025, the evidence of experts from RFSL, Mandi, as well as, from SFSL, Junga and the person, who took the case property, is only to be recorded. 14. The case is now stated to be fixed on 03.04.2025 for prosecution evidence. 13. It is the further case of the police that on 03.04.2025, the evidence of experts from RFSL, Mandi, as well as, from SFSL, Junga and the person, who took the case property, is only to be recorded. 14. As per the stand, taken by the police in the status report, the case is at the advance stage, as, only the evidence of expert from RFSL, Mandi, as well as, from SFSL, Junga and the person, who took the case property, is to be recorded. Meaning thereby, there is no undue delay in the trial and certainly, the case will conclude soon. 15. The applicant has been named as accused in a very heinous offence, as, according to the complainant, the child victim was adopted by the complainant and the applicant is none other than, but, the husband of the complainant. 16. At the time of 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 the individual liberty. 17. Even otherwise, 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. 18. Besides this, the applicant is resident of the adjoining State and his chances of fleeing away from the justice, cannot be ruled out. 19. In view of the discussions, made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case for his release on bail. 20. Consequently, the present bail application is dismissed. 21. 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.