Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sunder Lal And Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 15 December, 2016
Author: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr.M.P(M) No. 1494/2016 .
Decided on: 15.12.2016 Sunder Lal and another. ...Petitioners.
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. ...Respondent. _____________________________________________________________ of Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 No rt For the Petitioners: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Abhilasha Kaundal, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rupinder Tahkur, Addl. A.G. with Mr. J.S. Guleria Asstt. A.G. _________________________________________________________ Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge(oral):
The petitioners have sought regular bail in case FIR No. 56 of 2015, dated 20.6.2015, registered with the Police Station, Padhar, District Mandi, under Sections 302, 323, 325, 452, 436, 427, 147, 148, 149, 109, 115, 117 and 120- B of the IPC.
2. The respondent has produced the record of the investigation and have also filed the status report and also produced before me the statements of those witnesses which have till date been recorded before the Court.
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:44:55 :::HCHP 2
3. What emerges from the records of the investigating is that informant is one Gurvinder Singh, who was stated to be .
working with contractor Rajiv Sharma.
4. It is alleged that the work of contractor Rajiv Sharma was going on at Salgi/Kammand those days. It is further alleged that he alongwith his friends namely, Gagandeep of Singh, Balbinder Singh, Satbir Singh, Lovely, Harry, Teja Singh, Samarjeet Singh and Jitender alias Sheru had come on 17.6.2015 to work with contractor Rajiv Sharma at rt Salgi/Kammand. It is further alleged that on 20.6.2015 at about 10.30 A.M., when they were doing the work of contractor Rajiv Sharma at Salgi, then local workers alongwith other people came there and asked them to stop the work. It is further alleged that when the informant and his associates asked the persons who had come there that why they should stop the work, then the workers and the other people started arguing with them and started abusing the informant and his other associates. On this the local workers and the other people attacked them with stones and iron rods. It is alleged that in order to save themselves one of their friends namely, Samarjeet Singh fired in the air from his pistol. It is alleged that on this the mob became more violent and started beating them. It is alleged that the mob lifted them and threw them into the nallah and burnt the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:44:55 :::HCHP 3 three vehicles belonging to them. It is alleged that the mob entered the office and damaged the office. It is further .
alleged that the persons, who gave beatings to them were local people and workers affiliated to CITU. It is alleged that these persons were not known to him but he could recognize them by their faces. It is further alleged that in this attack of the informant and his friends received serious injuries and out of them Smarjeet Singh, Jitender Singh alias Sheru, Teja Singh alias Taj and Harry succumbed to their injuries. On rt these allegations FIR No. 56 of 2015 dated 20.6.2015 was registered at Police Station, Padhar, District Mandi, H.P. under Sections 302, 323, 325, 452, 436, 427, 147, 148, 149, 109, 115, 117 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
After the registration of the FIR the petitioners were arrested and since then they are in custody.
5. It is further revealed that the petitioners have not been named in the FIR. Apart from this, no identification parade has been conducted by the investigating agency and even otherwise the petitioners themselves have received serious injuries. Their exact and complicit role in the entire episode can only be arrived at after the regular trial of the case. However, till then the bail cannot be denied to the petitioners.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:44:55 :::HCHP 46. The petitioners are permanent residents of District Mandi and would be presumed to be having roots in the .
society. Even otherwise it is not the case of the prosecution that in the event of the petitioners being granted bail, they will misuse their liberty or would flee from justice or would not associate the trial. After all, one of the main of considerations for grant/non-grant of bail is availability of the accused during investigation and thereafter during the course of trial and if convicted to undergo and serve the rt sentence so imposed.
7. Having said so, this is a fit case where the discretion of bail can be exercised.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 56 of 2015, dated 20.6.2015, registered with the Police Station, Padhar, District Mandi, under Sections 302, 323, 325, 452, 436, 427, 147, 148, 149, 109, 115, 117 and 120- B of the IPC, on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-each with one surety of the like amount each, who shall be either father or any close relative of the petitioners, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mandi, District Mandi, with the following conditions:-
(i) They shall make themselves available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly attend ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:44:55 :::HCHP 5 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;
.
(ii) They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;
(iii) They shall not 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 of Court or the Police Officer, and
(iv) They shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court.
9. rt Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mandi, District Mandi, is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC.VIG./Misc. Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013.
10. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merit of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove. The petition stands disposed of.
Copy dasti.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan), Judge.
15.12.2016 *awasthi* ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:44:55 :::HCHP