Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ekta Malik vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 27 January, 2017
Author: Chander Bhusan Barowalia
Bench: Chander Bhusan Barowalia
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No. 83 of 2017 Decided on: 27th January, 2017 .
__________________________________________________________________ Ekta Malik ....Petitioner.
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. ...Respondent.
Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Vacation Judge.
of Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondent rt : Mr. M.L. Chauhan, Addl. AG, with Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Asstt. AG and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.
ASI Jaswant Singh, I.O. P.S. Dharampur, District Solan, H.P. _________________________________________________________________ Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge (oral).
The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking her release in case FIR No.68 of 2016, dated 27.06.2016, under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25-54-59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Dharampur, District Solan, H.P.
2. As per the petitioner, she was not involved in the offence at all and she, being innocent, has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The petitioner has further averred that she was married on 22.04.2016 in the family of Harbir Malik (co-
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:55:12 :::HCHP -2-accused) and on 26.06.2016 she alongwith her in-laws' family members came to Dharamshala and Shimla. At about 4:30-5:00 p.m., while en-route back to their homes, the petitioner alongwith other family members stopped at Urban Dhaba at Sanawara for .
refreshment. There they had altercation with the service boy and nephew of the deceased qua the quality of food. The deceased, with an intention to kill Nikhil Malik (husband of the petitioner), fired at him with a revolver. The medical record of Nikhil Malik of also substantiates that injuries sustained by him were caused by fire arm and were also dangerous to life. The husband of the rt petitioner had also sustained cut injuries caused by sharp edged weapon and the prosecution has recovered a sword from the spot of occurrence. The petitioner further contends that she is young lady of 24 years age and was arrested on 01.07.2016 and from 03.07.2016 she is in judicial custody. As per the petitioner, investigation of the case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from her. Lastly, the petitioner prayed that she may be enlarged on bail.
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 26.06.2016 complainant Taran Jeet Kaur, got her statement recorded with the police under Section 154 Cr.P.C. in PGI Chandigarh, wherein she has stated that her husband, Paramjeet Singh (deceased), was running a leased dhaba at Lower Sanawara, Solan, and nephew of her husband, Hansdeep Singh, was also looking after the work in the dhaba. On 26.06.2016, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:55:12 :::HCHP -3- around 5:00 p.m., a group of 10-15 people stopped at their dhaba and ordered bread toast, Maggie etc. An altercation, over the quality of food, took place between the complainant party and the people of the group. During the said altercation a boy from the .
group fired gun shots from a pistol and husband of the complainant received gun shot injuries. Thereafter, the aforesaid group ran away in a tempo traveler. The husband of the complainant was declared dead at CHC, Dharampur and Hansdeep of Singh, who also sustained gun shot injuries on his chest, was referred to PGI Chandigarh and the complainant accompanied him.
rt The complainant has alleged that people of the aforesaid group murdered her husband and appropriate action be taken against them. Police investigated the matter, affected recoveries and CCTV footage of the dhaba was also retrieved. Police, by laying nakka at Parwanoo, stopped the vehicle bearing registration No. UP14FT-3871, in which the accused persons were trying to flee. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. Accused persons were arrested on 27.06.2016, at 6:15 p.m. A bullet was extracted from the person of injured Hansdeep Singh. SFSL team also visited the spot and collected evidence. Report from FSL Junga was also obtained. CCTV footage was analyzed.
4. As per the prosecution, there is sufficient evidence qua involvement of the accused persons in the occurrence. The prosecution has also prayed that nature of the crime is heinous, thus the application of the petitioner may be dismissed.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:55:12 :::HCHP -4-5. Heard. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and by keeping her behind the bars for an unlimited period no fruitful purpose will be served. He has further argued that there is no direct evidence .
against the petitioner and she, being lady, may be released on bail.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner is involved in a heinous crime and is also out of State resident and in case she is enlarged on bail, she of may tamper with the prosecution evidence, as well as flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.
rt
6. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail.
7. At this moment, taking into consideration the age of the petitioner as well as the available evidence on the police file qua her involvement in the crime and without discussing the same at length, this Court finds that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period.
Considering the fact that the petitioner, being young lady, just married, the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in her favour. Therefore, it is ordered that the petitioner be released forthwith on bail, on her furnishing personal bond to the tune of `1,00,000/- (rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court, in case FIR No. ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:55:12 :::HCHP -5- 68 of 2016, dated 27.06.2016, under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25-54-59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Dharampur, District Solan, H.P. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:
.
(i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court as and when required.
(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
(iii) That the petitioner will not directly or of 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 Court.
rt
8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
Copy dasti.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
27th January, 2017 Vacation Judge
(virender)
Cr. MP (M) No.1575 of 2016
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:55:12 :::HCHP