Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sajid Ali vs State Of Hp on 29 May, 2019
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. MPM No. 745 of 2019 a/w
Cr. MPM Nos 746 & 747 of
.
2019.
Decided on: 29.5.2019
1. Cr.MPM No. 745 of 2019
Sajid Ali ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP ... Respondent.
................................................................................................
2. Cr.MPM No. 746 of 2019
Sajid Ali
State of HP
Versus
r to ....Petitioner.
... Respondent.
................................................................................................
3. Cr.MPM No. 747 of 2019
Sajid Ali ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of HP ... Respondent.
................................................................................................
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No
For the petitioner. : M/s. Ajay Kochhar & Vivek Sharma,
Advocates in all the petitions.
For the respondent : M/s. Dinesh Thakur & Sanjeev Sood,
Additional Advocate General with M/s
R. P. Singh & Amit Dhumal Dy.
Advocate Generals for the respondent
with ASI Rameh Verma PS Paonta
Sahib & ASI Hardev Singh PS Majra.
1
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP
2
Ajay Mohan Goel, J (Oral)
All these three applications are being disposed of by a .
common order. The prayer made in these applications on behalf of the petitioner is for grant of bail in the following FIRs i.e. FIR No. 4 of 2017 dated 4.11.2017 registered at Police Station Majra, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmaur under Sections 457, 380, 153A, 295 IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, FIR No. 439 of 2017 dated 8.10.2017 registered at Police Station Paonta Sahib Distt.
Sirmaur under Sections 295, 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act and FIR No. 19 of 2017 dated 4.12.2017 registered at Police Station Majra Tehsil Paonta Sahib Distt Sirmaur under Sections 436 and 295 of IPC.
2. A perusal of these petitions demonstrates that primarily the allegations against the petitioner are that he exploded crackers inside the mosque with the intent to incite hatred between communities, committed theft of CCTV apparatus from Pipliwala Mosque and also put religious book to flames.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a confirmed patient of psychiatry, as he is suffering from Chronic Psychotic Disorder, Type: Paranoid Schizophrenia. In order to substantiate the same, learned counsel has drawn the attention of ::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP 3 this Court to the medical certificate appended with the petition as also the psychiatric opinion of the doctor of the Department of .
Psychiatry, IGMC, Shimla. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to the statement recorded of the doctor concerned in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Court No.2, Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., wherein it has been stated by the doctor that he had examined the petitioner-Sajid Ali and that the patient is suffering from Schizophrenia (Type: Paranoid) and that the petitioner has active features of the said disorder and he is not able to defend himself in the court of law. On the strength of said document, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the rejection of applications filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in the above mentioned FIRs by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, Camp at Paonta Sahib, vide order dated 10.1.2019 is per se not sustainable in the eyes of law, as the findings returned by said Court while rejecting said applications that there was no material on record to demonstrate that the petitioner was suffering from psychiatry disorder are incorrect, as there was material before the Court including the statement of the doctor which was recorded in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.2, Paonta Sahib ::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP 4 itself. He has further argued that in view of the mental state of the petitioner prima facie no mens rea can be attributed to him, as he is .
not in a position to understand his acts. This submission learned counsel submits is without prejudice, because it is not as if the petitioner is conceding with the allegations levelled against him are correct.
4. On a query of the Court, learned counsel submits that petitioner is a local resident of village Toka Nagla, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur. He has family comprising of his brothers who permanently reside at the above address. His brothers are willing to furnish an undertaking that in case the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, he shall be kept by them in their custody and due medical treatment of his shall also be undertaken by them. He further submits that petitioner's brother shall also furnish an undertaking in terms of Section 330 of the Cr.P.C. before the petitioner is released on bail.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Deputy Advocate General and after going through the contents of the documents appended with the petition including the status report filed by the State, these applications are allowed.
Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to one of the ::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP 5 brothers of petitioner furnishing an undertaking before the learned trial court to the effect that he shall undertake to obtain regular out-
.
patient psychiatry treatment from the nearest medical hospital for the petitioner and shall also prevent injury for him or any other person.
In addition, further undertaking shall be furnished by the brother to the effect that he will ensure that the petitioner does not leave the State of Himachal Pradesh without the leave of learned trial court and that during the course of trial, he shall ensure the presence of the petitioner before learned trial court.
6. Accordingly, as mentioned above, these petitions are allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 4 of 2017 dated 4.11.2017 registered at Police Station Majra, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmaur under Sections 457, 380, 153A, 295 IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, FIR No. 439 of 2017 dated 8.10.2017 registered at Police Station Paonta Sahib Distt.
Sirmaur under Sections 295, 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act and FIR No. 19 of 2017 dated 4.12.2017 registered at Police Station Majra Tehsil Paonta Sahib Distt Sirmaur under Sections 436 and 295 of IPC on his furnishing personal bond to the tune of `25,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the ::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP 6 satisfaction of learned Trial Court on the following terms and conditions:-
.
(1) That the petitioner shall make himself available to the police or any other investigating agency or Court in the present case as and when required;
(2) That the petitioner 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 from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police Officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not in any manner try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;
(3) That he shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial;
(4) That the petitioner hall not commit the offence similar to offence to which he is accused or suspected;
(5) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner; (6) That the petitioner shall not jump over the bail; (7) That he shall not leave the territory of Himachal Pradesh without prior information;
These conditions are in addition to the undertaking to be furnished by one of the brothers of the petitioner. It is clarified that the petitioner shall be released on bail only after an undertaking in terms of present order is furnished by either of the brothers of petitioner before the learned trial court. It is further clarified that the observations made by this Court in this order are only for the purpose of adjudicating upon the present bail petition and the learned trial Court shall not be influenced by any of these observations while deciding the case on merits, in the course of trial. It shall be open for ::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP 7 the prosecution to move this Court for cancellation of the bail in case petitioner abuses the bail which has been granted in his favour.
.
Copy dasti.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 29th May, 2019.
(Guleria)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 29/05/2019 22:01:20 :::HCHP