Rakesh Kant Sharma vs State Of H.P on 2 March, 2015

[Cites 7, Cited by 4]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Rakesh Kant Sharma vs State Of H.P on 2 March, 2015

Bench: Sureshwar Thakur

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                         Cr.MP(M) No. 153 of 2015.

                                         Date of decision: 2.3.2015




                                                                                 .

Rakesh Kant Sharma                                                       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. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate.

For the respondent:                      Mr. R.S.Thakur, Additional Advocate General with
                                         Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Dy. A.G.


Sureshwar Thakur, J. (oral)

The instant application has been filed by the bail applicant under Section 438 read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., for the grant of anticipatory bail to him for his having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 411, 409, 406, 120(B) IPC, under Sections 5 & 7 of the H.P. Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practice Act and under Section 13(1)d(ii) PC Act in F.I.R. No.116 of 2014 registered at State CID Bharari, Shimla, on 20.11.2014.

On the last date of hearing the learned Additional Advocate General was directed to place on record a status report divulging therein whether the pending recovery of cement bags stands consummated at the instance of the bail 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:41:55 :::HCHP 2

applicant or not. Now, Rahul Sharma, Dy.S.P. Shimla, apprises this Court that no pending recoveries remain to be effected at the instance of the bail applicant. In view of the fact that no .

recoveries are required to be effected at the instance of the bail applicant and also when Mr. Rahul Sharma, Dy. S.P. apprises this Court that investigation has come to an end. 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 12.2.2014 is made absolute, subject to the fulfilling of the following conditions:

(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 is filed before the trial Court.

3. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. It is, however, made clear that ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:41:55 :::HCHP 3 the findings recorded hereinabove will have no bearing on the merits of the case.

Dasti copy.


    2nd March, 2015.                  (Sureshwar Thakur)
              ™                                     Judge.





                    r          to









                                          ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:41:55 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court