Hoshiyar Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 19 March, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 19]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Hoshiyar Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 19 March, 2020

Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur

                                                      1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
                              SHIMLA

                                         Cr.MMO No. 158 of 2020




                                                                                .

                                         Date of Decision: March 19, 2020

    Hoshiyar Singh                                                                  ...Petitioner.





                                                  Versus

    State of Himachal Pradesh                                                       ..Respondent.
    Coram:





    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the Petitioner:                  Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advocate.


    For the Respondent:                  Ms.Rameeta Rahi, Additional Advocate
                                         General, with Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Deputy
                                         Advocate General, for the respondent-
                                         State.


    Vivek Singh Thakur, J (oral)

This petition has been filed for relaxing/waiving off of condition No.9 imposed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-(II), Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (Camp at Sarkaghat), at the time of granting bail to the petitioner vide order dated 21.12.2019, passed in bail application No.644 of 2019, titled as Hoshiyar Singh vs. Stae of Himachal Pradesh.

2. Petitioner has sought waiving off and relaxing the aforesaid condition on the ground that initially co-accused Anil Kumar was enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this High Court vide order dated 06.12.2019, passed in Cr.M.P.(M) No. 2084 of 2019, titled as Anil Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, imposing 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2020 20:23:54 :::HCHP 2

similar condition, but later on vide order dated 20.02.2020 passed in Cr.M.P.No. 445 of 2020 in Cr.M.P.(M) No.2084 of 2019, the Coordinate Bench has modified the said order by deleting the said .

condition substituting by new condition that in case petitioner repeats the offences or indulges in any such behaviour with the victims, then this condition No.(9) shall revive automatically.

3. It is plea of petitioner that learned Sessions Judge had imposed condition No.9 on the basis of condition No.(j) imposed by the High Court in Anil Kumar's case and now when the High Court

r to has modified the condition in Anil Kumar's case, petitioner is also entitled for the same treatment.

I am of considered view that in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner should have approached the concerned Court i.e. learned Additional Sessions Judge-(II), Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (Camp at Sarkaghat), who has imposed the condition, for deletion/ modification/ relaxing/waiving off thereof.

5. Faced with this situation, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach learned Additional Sessions Judge-(II), Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (Camp at Sarkaghat), with appropriate application for the identical relief sought in the present petition.

Accepting prayer, liberty as prayed for, is granted to the petitioner.

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn in aforesaid terms.

Copy dasti.

(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.

March 19, 2020 (Purohit) ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2020 20:23:54 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court