Himachal Pradesh High Court
Parshant Rathour vs State Of H.P on 31 October, 2018
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P (M) No. 990 of 2018 along with Cr.MP (M) Nos. 991, 992, 993 and 994 of 2018 .
Date of decision: 31.10.2018
1. Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 Parshant Rathour. ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent
2. Cr.M.P(M) No. 991 of 2018 Digvijay Singh. ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. r ...Respondent 3. Cr.M.P(M) No. 992 of 2018 Naveen Sharma. ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent 4. Cr.M.P(M) No. 993 of 2018 Rohit Nainta. ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent 5. Cr.M.P(M) No. 994 of 2018 Sanjay Kumar. ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.Shiv Pal Manhans, Additional Advocate General with Mr.R.P. Singh and Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Deputy Advocate Generals.
ASI Sohan Lal, Incharge Police Post Sarswati Nagar, Police Station, Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P. present in person along with record.
Vivek Singh Thakur Judge (oral) On the date of incident, petitioner(s) herein were serving as Forest Guards in the Forest Department of State of Himachal Pradesh and Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP 2 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters were members of Special Investigating Team constituted by the Department for removal of encroachments upon the forest land. All of them are in judicial custody in case FIR No. 61 of 2018 dated 25.7.2018, registered in Police .
Station Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 302, 341, 323, 452, 147, 148 and 149 I.P.C.
2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 24.7.2018 at about 10:45 P.M., H.C. Parmod Kumar posted in Police Station, Rohru had informed Police Post, Sarswati Nagar from Civil Hospital, Rohru that an injured person has been brought in the hospital for treatment, whose Medico Legal Certificate had been received with opinion of the doctor that injured was fit for making statement, whereupon police officials rushed to Civil Hospital, Rohru and recorded the statement of injured Gulam, S/o Sh. Lali under Section 154 Cr.P.C., wherein he had stated that he was a nomadic Gujjar and was residing along with his brother Azad Ali in the forest situated on upper side of village Bholad. He had further stated that they used to reside for 6 months at Dehradun and for 4 months in Forest Bholad and spent 2 months in shifting from Dehradun to Bholad and vice versa. It was further stated that on 24.7.2018 at about 2:00 P.M. he had awaken to see his cattle and at that time one person of village Bholad known to him as Tinu S/o Ramesh along with another person had attacked him with kick and fist blows and had also beaten him with the help of sticks after restraining his path and he had got him free with great difficulty and run away. On raising alarm by him, both of them had also run from the spot.
3. It is the case of prosecution that victim Gulam was referred from Civil Hospital Rohru to IGMC, Shimla, however on 27.7.2018 Azad Ali brother of victim Gulam had informed Police Post Sarswati Nagar on 6:10 P.M. about death of victim Gulam Ali in village Bholad, whereupon case registered under Sections 341, 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C. was converted into case under ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP 3 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters Section 302 IPC and further investigation was carried out. Main accused Raveen, after arrest on 29.7.2018 was remanded by the JMIC, Jubbal to police custody till 4th August, 2018 and thereafter he is in judicial custody. As .
per prosecution case, during investigation main accused Raveen had disclosed that in the night of 23rd/24th July, 2018, he along with Forest Guards Sanjay Kumar, Rohit Nainta, Digvijay Singh, Naveen and Prashant had brought the victim Gulam to Sarni Khad, where victim had shown stolen devdar slipper and there from he was brought to a cave. It is case of prosecution that during that night all of them had beaten victim Gulam, which has caused his death.
4. Victim Gulam, in statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C., had stated that he was brought to hospital by his brother for treatment of injuries suffered by him as he was beaten by two person i.e. Raveen alias Tinu and another person accompanying Raveen, but because of night time and lack of transportation facility, he disclosed the incident to his brother during day time, who brought him to Civil Hospital Rohru for treatment. In the said statement, he had further prayed for legal action against these two culprits.
5. After death of victim Gulam in village Bholad on 27.7.2018, informed to police by Azad Ali, brother of victim, statement of Azad Ali was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein he stated that on 24.7.2018, on reaching in the Dera of Abbal at 10:00 A.M. he found that victim Gulam, Abbal and Mastu were not there. On inquiring from children about Gulam, they told that he had not come in the Dera since night. Abbal informed him telephonically that they were beaten by Tinu and 4-5 Forest Guards. Thereafter he went in search of his brother in the forest and found him sitting in the path near the Dera of Abbal, who disclosed to him that during night at about 2:00 A.M. after calling him out he was beaten with kick and fist blows by ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP 4 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters Tinu along with 5-6 persons and these persons were asking for permit and were alleging that victim was involved in theft of forest timber and they took him to Sarni Khad and out of those persons he had identified only two .
persons. He acknowledged visit of police in hospital at Rohru and making of statement and putting his thumb impression thereon by victim Gulam under Section 154 Cr.P.C. As per his statement victim Gulam was referred by doctor to IGMC, Shimla and therefore, on 25.7.2018 victim was taken to IGMC, Shimla, wherefrom he was further referred to Chandigarh, but victim could not be taken to Chandigarh but was brought back to Bholad and where his treatment was continued at village, where he had expired on 27.7.2018.
6. A supplementary statement of Azad Ali has also been recorded on 31st July, 2018, wherein in addition to earlier statement made by him, he stated that after beating his brother victim Gulam, assailants had left him in the cave and assailants had also beaten Mastu and Abbal, but they had saved themselves by running to the forest. He further stated that though his brother was referred to IGMC, Shimla, but for want of funds, he could not take his brother to Shimla, but brought him back to village Bholad where he was kept in the house of one Sanju and was treated through private doctor and on 27th July, 2018, they were shifting the victim Gulam to Dheradun for his treatment and vehicle was also engaged for that purpose, but when he was brought on the road at about 5:30 P.M., he succumbed to the injuries on the road, whereafter police was informed about his death.
7. Statement of victim Gulam under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded in presence of his brother Azad Ali and in his statement recorded on 27th July, 2018, Azad Ali has also endorsed the correctness of the said statement made by victim. But in his statement recorded on 27.7.2018 instead of two persons he has leveled allegations against 5-6 persons along with main accused Tinu for beating his brother victim Gulam Ali. ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP
5 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters
8. It is a fact that victim Gulam has expired on 27th July, 2018 and as per post mortem report, cause of death is antimortem injuries on his body. In view of conflicting statements made by victim Gulam and his brother Azad, .
role of present petitioners is yet to be established before the trial Court. Another issue arising out of statements of prosecution evidence placed before me i.e. as to whether there was one person with Tinu or he was accompanying by 5-6 persons at the time of giving alleged beatings to Gulam and also that as to whether victim Gulam died on account of such beatings or for want of proper treatment. At the time of making statement by victim Gulam under Section 154 Cr.P.C., his brother Azad Ali, who was present there, had never objected to the said statement nor he informed the police that it was not Tinu and one person accompanying him, but there were 5-6 persons along with Tinu, who had beaten Gulam. As yet there is no explanation for not disclosing the incident by victim Gulam to the police on 24.7.2018 when his statement was recorded in hospital. Azad Ali, who claimed to have been informed about incident by victim Gulam as well as Abbal in the morning of 24.7.2018 has also, till date, not assigned any reason for not disclosing the same to police on 24.7.2018 and/or for not objecting to statement of victim Gulam, wherein facts, as disclosed by him on 27.7.2018, were not told to police. The evidence collected by Investigating Agency is yet to be considered and scrutinized by the trial Court after recording the evidence in the Court. However, without commenting upon merits of case, keeping in view entire evidence collected by prosecution, it would not be appropriate to keep the present petitioners behind the bars, as no fruitful purpose is going to be served, particularly when nothing is to be recovered from them and their custodial investigation is also over and further that their role in the incident is yet to be established.
::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP
6 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters
9. Accordingly, petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 61 of 2018, dated 25.7.2018, under Sections 302, 341, 323, 452, 147, 148 and 149 I.P.C., registered at Police Station, Jubbal, District .
Shimla, H.P., if not required in any other case, subject to their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of trial Court.
10. Petitioners shall further abide by the following conditions:-
(i) That the petitioners shall make themselves available to the police or any other investigating agency or Court in the present case as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or 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 Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. They shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) that they shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial;
(iv) that the petitioners shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which they are accused or suspected;
(v) that the petitioners shall not misuse their liberty in any manner;
(vi) that the petitioners shall not jump over the bail;
(vii) they shall not leave the territory of Himachal Pradesh without prior permission of the Court.
11. It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing and/or to the trial Court to impose any other condition on the petitioners as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.
12. In case the petitioners violate any condition imposed upon them, their bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail, in accordance with law.
::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP
7 Cr.M.P(M) No. 990 of 2018 and connected matters
13. Learned trial Court is directed to ensure compliance of directions issued by this High Court vide communication No. HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139, dated 18th March, 2013.
.
14. Observations made in this petition hereinbefore shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and will strictly confine for disposal of these bail applications.
15. Petitions stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Copy Dasti.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
31st October, 2018 Judge.
(KRS)
::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2018 22:58:10 :::HCHP