Himachal Pradesh High Court
Shashi Pal Banolta vs State Of H.P on 18 April, 2015
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 325 of 2015.
Date of decision: 18.4.2015
.
Shashi Pal Banolta Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. Respondent.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Whether approved for reporting?1.
For the petitioner:
r Mr. B.R. Kashyap, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Dy. A.G.
Sureshwar Thakur, J. (oral)
The instant application has been filed by the bail applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., for the grant of anticipatory bail to him for his having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506 IPC recorded in F.I.R. No.174 of 2014 registered at Police Station Bangana on 12.12.2014.
On the previous date of hearing a direction was rendered to the Investigating Officer to elicit, by issuing a written Hukumnama upon him, the cooperation of the bail applicant in his investigation into the offences allegedly 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:01:00 :::HCHP 2committed by him. The Investigating Officer has apprised this Court that the said order stood complied with by him. He has also apprised this Court that the bail applicant has rendered .
full and effective cooperation to him in the investigation carried out by him into the offences allegedly committed by the bail applicant. Given the fact that the prosecutrix is a major and when entwining the said fact with the fact of rendition of cooperation by the bail applicant to the investigating officer in the investigation carried out by the latter into the offences allegedly committed by the bail applicant, constrains this Court, to, hence not deem it necessary to order for his custodial interrogation. Moreover, when no further investigation is required to be carried out, further facilitates this Court to conclude that the custodial interrogation of the bail applicant would be wholly uncalled for, besides unnecessary. In face thereof and in face of the fact that at this stage no material has been placed on record by the prosecution disclosing that in case the facility of bail is accorded to the bail applicant, there is every likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution evidence.
As a sequel, the bail application is allowed and the order of 1.4.2015 is made absolute, subject to his fulfilling the following conditions:
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:01:00 :::HCHP 3(i) That the bail applicant shall join the investigation, as and when required by the investigating agency;
(ii) That he shall not directly or indirectly advance any threat, inducement or promise to any person .
acquainted with the facts of the case and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) That he shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.
(iv) That he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Police Station, concerned;
(v) That in case of violation of any of these conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be forfeited and he shall be liable to be taken into custody; and
(vi) That he shall apply for bail afresh when the challan r is filed before the trial Court.
3. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. It is, however, made clear that the findings recorded hereinabove will have no bearing on the merits of the case.
18th April, 2015. (Sureshwar Thakur)
™ Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:01:00 :::HCHP