Himachal Pradesh High Court
Next Friend Khushi Ram Verma vs And on 8 December, 2021
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 8th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
.
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) No.2315 of 2021
Between
MOHAN LAL SHARMA
S/O SHRI BODH RAJ,
R/O PAL NIWAS, BHATAKUFAR, SHIMLA,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
THROUGH
NEXT FRIEND KHUSHI RAM VERMA
S/O SHRI NARSIM DUTT. .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI NARESHWAR SINGH CHANDEL
SANJEEV BHUSHAN AND ANKUSH DASS SOOD,
SENIOR ADVOCATES, WITH MR. SURENDER
VERMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI HEMANT VAID, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
GENERAL)
(SI HET RAM, I/O POLICE STATION DHALLI, SHIMLA,
H.P. IN PERSON)
Reserved on : 6.12.2021
Decided on : 8.12.2021
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for pronouncement this day, the
Court passed the following:
ORDER
By way of this petition, petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.'), in case FIR No.219 of 2021, dated 2.12.2021, registered in Police Station Dhalli, Shimla, ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...2...
H.P., under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').
.
2. Status Report stands filed. Record has been produced for perusal, wherein complaint filed by the complainant has been reproduced in detail.
3. As per the complaint, petitioner, by making false promise to the complainant to marry, created misconception and violated her person by deceiving her as well as forcibly.
On the basis of complaint, FIR under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') has been registered.
4. During investigation, after finding his involvement in commission of offence during his interrogation, petitioner has been arrested on 2.12.2021 at 10.30 p.m. Petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.3, Shimla, on 3.12.2021. Statement of complainant has also been recorded, under Section 164 Cr.P.C., before the Magistrate, wherein she has reiterated that petitioner had violated her person after giving false promise to marry her.
5. Facts contained in the complaint, in brief, are that the complainant, permanent resident of Shimla, but living in Chandigarh since 1994, was at her home in Shimla since April 2020 for spread of Pandemic COVID-19. In October, 2020, she came in contact of one Pandit Yograj Sharma, who suggested ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...3...
her to marry with petitioner, a practicing Lawyer in Shimla High Court, who was residing in a rented accommodation, in .
vicinity of her residence, since last 6-7 years, by referring him a very good man having good practice in the High Court.
According to complainant, she was not very keen about this proposal because of difference in caste, background and location of practice and, therefore, she repelled the proposal of Pandit, but the Pandit had insisted to go ahead for this.
6. It is stated in the complaint that in the beginning requests of petitioner, to meet him, were repelled by the complainant by giving excuses as she was not interested and, thus, refused to accept his proposal. However, whenever Pandit met her he always reopened this issue for which complainant was not interested. According to her, she was aware of it that long distance relationship never works. It is further plea of the complainant that in the meanwhile they were connected with each other as professionals for 3-4 months and during this period petitioner convinced her to consider his proposal to marry and petitioner made her to believe that even after marriage she may continue her practice in Punjab and Haryana High Court and he was also ready to settle in Chandigarh in future, whereupon complainant, after giving lot of thought, decided to meet petitioner and on 1.1.2021, she met the petitioner in Laxmi ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...4...
Narayan Mandir Sanjauli and then on request of petitioner to have a cup of coffee, she accompanied him in his car for a .
long drive to Naldehra, where they had snacks and tea in some Resort and came back around 9 p.m. and after dropping her near her residence, petitioner had asked her, telephonically, about her thought regarding marriage proposal, but the complainant had expressed her reservation, for place of practice at different locations, but petitioner convinced her by saying that Chandigarh was not far away from Shimla and they can join together on weekends. Being convinced, complainant started talking and meeting the petitioner and, initially, it appeared to complainant that petitioner was very serious about marriage as he was talking about plans for marriage and future settlement etc. with assurance that he wanted to get married during this year (2021) in the month of June or July, after completing construction of his house by that time. Due to it, complainant considered his proposal seriously and discussed it with her family and though her family was not very much interested about this proposal but they communicated their no objection if complainant considered the petitioner nice and compatible.
7. In aforesaid background, petitioner visited place of residence of complainant on 22.1.2021, for first time. On next day, i.e. 23.1.2021, it was birthday of petitioner, so on that ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...5...
day he stayed at her place and they celebrated birthday together and on that day, for the first time, petitioner made .
physical relations with complainant and they spent whole day together at her place and the petitioner made physical relations with her for 3-4 times and, thereafter, left her place at 7-8 p.m. Next morning, petitioner dropped her at Goyal College for examination of Bar Council of India and after examination he picked her up from the Centre and dropped her at Dhalli and during this period they had some arguments with each other. On asking of the petitioner, she prepared lunch for him, who came to her place at around 2-3 p.m. and on that day he again made physical relation with her and after having lunch, he had gone to his native place and, thereafter, they remained in contact of each other telephonically.
According to complainant, gradually she found little bit change in behaviour of petitioner.
8. As per complaint, petitioner spent night of 10.2.2021 with complaint at her place of residence and copulated with her and left for the Court in the next morning.
On 12.2.2021, which was Birthday of complainant, petitioner came to her residence to wish her and after having meals went on his work. In the evening, both of them planned to go out for dinner, but on disclosure of petitioner that his car was not available, for having been sent for service, plan was ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...6...
changed and dinner was ordered at her place. On arrival of the petitioner at 9 pm, they had dinner together and petitioner .
stayed there upto 11.30 to 12 night and left for his residence after having copulation by saying that on next day he had to conduct a very important case in the Court. On next day, i.e. 13.2.2021 at about 10.30 - 11 pm, petitioner expressed his desire to come to the complainant on the pretext that he was very disturbed on that day and he came, stayed and copulated with her and left the house on 14.2.2021 in the morning after having breakfast, but again came after 2-3 hours with his relative to see the room for rent and stayed with her throughout the day and night, and on that night also again had physical relation with her and left the place on next morning (15.2.2021).
9. As per complainant, she had asked petitioner to get married, whereupon, after having discussion regarding marriage, petitioner had conveyed that on next day they will marry in the Court. According to complainant, she was little bit hesitant to get married in hurry and without consulting her family, but as the petitioner was appearing to the quite serious about Court marriage, she agreed for Court marriage but with a doubt in her mind and she rechecked with the petitioner about their Court marriage proposed on next day.
In response, petitioner had refused by saying 'no' and in the ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...7...
evening petitioner informed her on mobile that on consulting 2-3 persons closed to him, he had been suggested not to get .
married in a hurry as this marriage would not be fruitful for him, because complainant was staying in Chandigarh.
Thereafter, petitioner had put a condition that in case complainant would stay with him at Shimla and start practicing in Shimla High Court then he would marry with her.
As per complainant, as she wanted to marry, so she agreed to the proposal of the petitioner. It is the case of complainant that after that there was great change in behaviour of the petitioner and he started to back-out from his promises with excuses, one after another, and started to argue on small issues in order to get rid of her.
10. It is further stated in the complaint that on 1st March, petitioner again stayed with complainant, during night, and made physical relation with her and left in the next morning. On 2nd March, complainant left for Chandigarh for conducting a case. On that day, petitioner had replied very casually to the message of the complainant sent from Chandigarh on her arrival. On enquiry, on 3rd March, about his place of stay during last night, petitioner had replied that he was not a slave of the complainant with further utterance that 'sorry Hamari baat nehi ban sakti'. It shocked the complainant and she replied that petitioner could not do such ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...8...
thing with her and she would not let him to go like this. But petitioner did not reply to this and after that never called her .
or sent message to her, which shocked the complainant.
11. It is further stated in the complaint that the complainant came back from Chandigarh on 20th March and sent an SMS to the petitioner on 27th March, asking the reason for his behaviour, whereupon the petitioner explained that he was having some medical issue and the complainant believed him again and started talking with him.
12. On the occasion of Holi Festival, on 29th March, the petitioner visited the complainant, stayed with her, made physical relationship during night and left in the next morning, and thereafter started avoiding the complainant and on asking about marriage he came with new excuses, like he did not want to get married or would like to marry after 2-3 months or 10 years or saying that he would marry with her to give her legal status of his wife but would not stay with her. According to the complainant, petitioner spoke to her mother and told that he was not well and busy in construction of house and asked for some time. Thereafter, the petitioner stated avoiding the complainant by giving lame excuses and started saying that why complainant was after him, and he did not want to marry and sometimes commented about age of the complainant.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021...9...
13. As per complainant, she had a feeling that petitioner never wanted to marry with her since beginning but .
intended to exploit her physically and mentally and had played with her emotions and trust by exploiting her physically, mentally and emotionally, whereas, she was looking for life partner but not for any passing affair or any boy friend, however, the petitioner spoiled her image and reputation by spreading rumors and abusive things about her, destroying her reputation in the eyes of her family, relatives by exploiting her on the pretext of marriage for his selfish motive.
14. As per complaint, in the month of June, complainant called Pandit and narrated him everything about the petitioner, whereupon Pandit had assured her that after coming to Shimla from Hoshiarpur, he would talk to the landlord of petitioner, but thereafter Mobile Phone of Pandit was always switched off.
15. As per complainant, she went to her native village on 11th May for one month and in between she called the petitioner, who responded by saying that being a patient of CORONA, he needed some rest and as talks with complainant gave him stress so he asked to allow him to recover first. On 15th June, after coming from native village, complainant sent an SMS about her arrival and asked the petitioner to talk ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...10...
about whatever he wanted to talk, but the petitioner told that he was going to his village and would reply to her call on .
coming back. But thereafter he never called her and switched off his Mobile Phone for a week, whereupon, complainant dropped a message to him on FACEBOOK Messenger.
According to complainant, she received some information from village of the petitioner that he was living with a widow lady, who was also helping him monetarily.
16. As per complainant, on 15.7.2021 at about 7 pm, she made a call to the petitioner, asking him about his next plan.
Thereafter, on asking of petitioner, she met him near Shiv Mandir Dhalli, wherefrom they went to By-pass Tara Devi road and during discussion about marriage on the way petitioner expressed that he would marry after five years and asked the complainant whether she would be waiting for him.
The complainant, giving reference of age, asked him to marry at the earliest, whereupon, petitioner started touching her inappropriately and stopped the car on the road and started kissing and touching her body everywhere and made oral physical relation with her and then replied that he cannot marry her by saying that in fact he did not want to get married with anyone and asked the complainant to leave him, by saying that it was last meeting and whenever the complainant would need any help he would be there for her. This shocked ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...11...
the complainant and they had argument on the way to back home and complainant told the petitioner that she was going .
to file a police complaint against him.
17. According to complainant, she had already written the complaint, which was with her and on the way back home on 15.7.2021 at about 10 pm, she went to Dhalli Police Station and petitioner was accompanying her, and he enquired about Station House Officer, but there was only one Police staff present at that time in the Police Station, and without filing the complaint, both of them came back. On the way, petitioner snatched the complaint from the complainant and took it with him. The complainant started feeling that petitioner had used her as an object and he never intended to marry her and was just buying the time only. It has been stated in the complaint that she was having full doubt that petitioner was already involved with someone deeply.
According to her, during argument, he had admitted indirectly that he was married, so he cannot marry and when she grilled him about it then he backed out from his words.
18. Next day, on 16th July, complainant filed a written complaint against the petitioner in the Police Station but, lateron, after intervention of the Investigating Officer Praveen, she had withdrawn her complaint, after having long discussion with petitioner, who convinced her, with assurance that he ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...12...
would give an affidavit in 1-2 days, with assurance to get married with complainant in February and he also sent SMS on .
Whatsapp to her by saying that he would be giving affidavit to her within two days. Agreeing to that, complainant withdrew the complaint, but the petitioner never gave any affidavit, as promised by him. For backing out from the assurance of swearing-in affidavit, petitioner had given explanation to the complainant that he was having relationship for four years with another 29 years old lady, who was preparing for Civil Examinations, and though relationship of petitioner with her was broken and they parted away, but, after passing of six months, she came back in his life and was asking for `10 lakhs as compensation from him, with threat that otherwise she would file police complaint against the petitioner. By telling so, the petitioner had asked the complainant to arrange `10 lakhs, by any means, including taking loan from the bank, as, according to him, it was responsibility of the complainant to save him from this problem, whereupon the complainant had agreed to pay `10 lakhs, but only after meeting that female, whereupon petitioner had refused to do so.
19. It is further case of the complainant that on 29th July, complainant called the petitioner, enquiring about affidavit and the petitioner convinced her to come to his place for sitting and discussing together the terms and conditions of ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...13...
the affidavit. Though complainant was not interested to go to his place, but for insistence by the petitioner, she went there .
for first time, where petitioner made physical relation with her, but without talking anything about affidavit. When complainant asked about that, petitioner assured to give the same after returning from native place.
20. It is further stated in the complaint that petitioner was under the influence and control of one Advocate couple and on receiving a call at their end, on 29th July, petitioner had left his residence within 5 minutes, asking the complainant to leave his residence immediately. Petitioner had been claiming that wife of his friend Advocate was treating him like elder brother.
21. According to complainant, on 5th August again, petitioner invited her at his place to meet him, but she refused, however by making one hour long call to her he succeeded in convincing her by mounting lot of pressure upon her and made her to meet him at his place. On that day also, petitioner, repeatedly, but without her consent, made physical relation with her. According to her, as a few drops of semen fell on her jeans, so she did not wash the jeans, which can be analysed by the Forensic Science Laboratory.
22. It is further case of the complainant that when she was at the place of the petitioner, complainant, on request of ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...14...
petitioner, handed over her mobile phone to the petitioner after unlocking it, whereupon petitioner started reading her .
Whatsapp chat and she was sitting next to him. Some of the chats were with the Advocate friend of the petitioner, which was related to the petitioner as once that Advocate friend had tried to patch-up between her and petitioner and some of the messages, conveyed by Advocate friend, related to petitioner were very important, which were against the petitioner. The petitioner read all the chats between her and petitioner, which they were having since October 2020 and, during this exercise, petitioner hacked her phone and scanned her Whatsapp and on next morning, i.e. 6.8.2021, she found that all Whatsapp data of chat between her and petitioner had been deleted from her Whatsapp window and it was blank and, as such, petitioner destroyed one year chat history from the phone of the complainant. On enquiring about it, petitioner replied that it might have been deleted by mistake.
According to the complainant, it was done by the petitioner to destroy the evidence against him.
23. According to her, when she had objected frequent visits of petitioner to the house of Advocate couple, petitioner had kept his mobile on speaker mode, so that the Advocate couple could listen everything being communicated by her to the petitioner about the couple and, thereafter, the Advocate ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...15...
couple had also deleted her Whatsapp chat saved in her mobile with the help of hacker and destroyed the entire .
evidence available with her against the petitioner. According to the complainant, under the influence of Advocate couple, petitioner had blocked her on Whatsapp after 12th August, and till the date of filing the complaint, she was not having any contact with the petitioner, which, according to her, clearly indicates that petitioner was buying time to destroy the evidence and had violated her by giving false promise of marriage.
24. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that even if the story, contained in the complaint, is taken to be true as it is, then also it is not a case of violation of her person by giving false promise to marry, but it is a case of broken relationship between the petitioner and the complainant, as at no point of time complainant had submitted herself to the petitioner for copulation under any such misconception.
According to him, in the beginning, petitioner was interested but lateron the match was not found suitable and compatible not only by the petitioner but the complainant was also thinking on those lines, as stated by the complainant herself in the complaint and, therefore, there was no question of submitting herself by the complainant to the petitioner for ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...16...
physical relationship under misconception, on account of false promise to marry.
.
25. It has been contended that even if it is considered that it was the petitioner who had shown interest to get married to the complainant, then also at no point of time, at the time of involvement of the petitioner and complainant in making physical relationship, petitioner had extended any promise to marry for doing so, and, at the most, it may be a case of false promise to marry but not a case of involvement of the complainant and petitioner in physical relationship on account of misconception, on the basis of that promise and, for not abiding to the promise, petitioner may be, at the most, guilty of commission of offence under Section 420 IPC, but entire complaint nowhere discloses that the physical relationship between the petitioner and the complainant was for such promise. According to him, rather, facts and circumstances contained in the complaint show that not only once but number of times, after express reluctance and refusal of the petitioner to marry, both of them indulged in sexual intercourse.
26. It has been contended that, from the very beginning, there was no consensus between the petitioner and the complainant regarding compatibility for getting married and as per contents of the complaint, in the ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...17...
beginning, petitioner had shown his interest to marry with the complainant, but their relations became strained and both of .
them did not decide to marry each other for want of compatibility, which was expressed by the petitioner so many times and it is a case of complainant that she was doubting about intention of the petitioner since February 2021, but despite that she involved in physical relationship with the petitioner not only at place of her residence, but also at the place of residence of the petitioner by visiting there voluntarily.
27. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that complainant in present case is also an Advocate, practicing in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, who, even after refusal or reluctance of the petitioner, had not only allowed but had volunteered for allowing violation of her person by the petitioner. According to him, it is not a case of complete surrender by a girl, for promise to marry, but it is a case of persons, who are grown-ups of matured age, well conversant with, and having knowledge of, result of their deeds of their involvement in the sexual activity, and they involved in such activity, irrespective of offer to marry and response thereto and, thus, their physical relationship was independent of their talks, offers and counter offers, between them for finalizing the decision to marry, as pending ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...18...
consideration the offer to marry and prior to any final decision in that regard, petitioner and complainant had opted to .
involve and continue making physical relationship as has been revealed in the complaint. According to him, had it been not so, then complainant would not have indulged in physical relationship even after refusal/declining to marry by the petitioner, rather, to the contrary, she not only invited, permitted and entertained the petitioner at her place of residence but also visited the place of residence of the petitioner and allowed him to violate her person and did not complain anywhere to any authority despite the fact that the said violation of her person has been claimed to be forcible violation. It has been contended that allegation of forcible violation by the petitioner in his room is an afterthought, as even after such violation on 29th July, complainant opted to visit the petitioner in the same room on 5th August again and handed over her mobile phone, after unlocking it, and allowed surfing of her Whatsapp chats in her mobile by the petitioner by sitting next to him, and by that time, according to complainant, she had lost faith in the petitioner and she was doubting his credibility about his promise to marry and despite that she allowed her to be violated without resistance pre or post copulation. It has been submitted that complaint was not lodged after 29th July or 5th August, but on 2.12.2021 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...19...
and till then, as claimed by the complainant, she preserved her jeans having semen of petitioner thereon for production .
thereof to the police for the purpose of chemical analysis in the Forensic Science Laboratory, despite the fact that it is case of the complainant that since 12th August, till lodging of the FIR, she had no contact with the petitioner and he had blocked her on Whatsapp.
28. It has also been contended that, as per complainant herself, the petitioner had accompanied her to Police Station during night hours, when she had expressed desire to lodge complaint against him, which reflects bonafide of the petitioner and further that submission of the complaint by the complainant on 16th July clearly indicates that it was well within the knowledge of the complainant that petitioner was not going to marry with her and despite that she indulged in making physical relationship by visiting the place of residence of the petitioner twice.
29. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that after having intimacy visit of a girl to a boy in a lonely place, particularly place of residence of the boy, to meet him alone, as has been done by the complainant, is clear indicator of consent of the girl to indulge in physical relationship with the boy and, therefore, it has been contended that allegation of ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021 ...20...
forcible physical relationship by the petitioner with the complainant in his room is not believable.
.
30. Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the detailed complaint, submitted by the complainant, is self-explanatory about the conduct and behaviour of the petitioner, who, by giving false promise to marry, had developed physical relations with the complainant and, thus, has committed and offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. He has further submitted that on 15th July, petitioner had visited the Police Station alongwith the complainant in order to ensure that no complaint was filed and, in case any complaint was filed, then to resolve the matter there and then, by cheating the petitioner, as has been done on the next day by the petitioner. It has further been submitted that even if it is considered that physical relations were developed with consent of the complainant, then also at least last incident of 5th August of violation of person of complainant was without consent, as expressly stated by the complainant in her complaint.
31. Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that petitioner has spoiled life of a girl by developing physical relationship and giving false promise to marry and, thus has committed a heinous crime.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021...21...
32. Learned counsel for the petitioner, for substantiating his plea, has relied upon pronouncement of the .
Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and another, (2019) 9 SCC 608, wherein, almost in similar circumstances, FIR against the accused, who was granted anticipatory bail by the High Court of Bombay, was quashed by the Supreme Court, by reversing the verdict of High Court of Bombay. Apart from other paragraphs, learned counsel has, specifically, emphasized Para-18 of the judgment, which reads as under:
"18. To summarise the legal position that emerges from the above cases, the "consent" of a woman with respect to Section 375 must involve an active and reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act. To establish whether the "consent"
was vitiated by a "misconception of fact" arising out of a promise to marry, two propositions must be established. The promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct nexus to the woman's decision to engage in the sexual act."
33. So far as plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner that for intimacy between the parties, visit of a girl to the place of petitioner to meet him, in exclusion of all others, at a lonely place or residence of the boy, is indicator of consent for physical relationship, is not acceptable, as every exclusive meeting of a girl and a body is not always for only sole purpose of indulging in making physical relations.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021...22...
Accepting invitation of a boy to visit his place alone, even during odd hours, is not treated to be an implied consent for .
violation of her person. Such invitation may be accepted for so many other reasons, apart from copulation.
34. In present case, after giving thoughtful consideration to the facts and circumstances, placed on record, without commenting upon the claims and counterclaims of the parties, but taking into consideration place factors and parameters required to be considered at the time of considering the bail application, including the pronouncements of the Supreme Court, I am of the opinion that petitioner, at this stage, is entitled for grant of bail.
35. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in FIR No.219/2021, dated 2.12.2021, registered in Police Station Dhalli, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, upon such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court, including the conditions enumerated hereinafter, so as to ensure presence of the petitioner at the time of trial:
(i) 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;::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021
...23...
(ii) 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;
(iii) that the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial;
(iv) that the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected;
(v) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner;
(vi) that the petitioner shall not jump over the bail
(vii) that in case petitioner indulges in repetition of similar offence(s) then, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution;
(viii) that the petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission;
(ix) that the petitioner shall inform the Police/Court his contact number and shall keep on informing about change in address and contact number, if any, in future.
36. It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing and/or to the trial Court to impose any other condition on the petitioner as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and thereupon, it will also be open to the trial Court to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS CRMPM No.2315/2021...24...
37. In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed upon him, his 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.
38. Trial Court 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.
39. Observations made in this petition hereinbefore, shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly confined for the disposal of the bail application.
40. Petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.
Petitioner is permitted to produce a copy of this order, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the trial Court/authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, may verify it from Website of the High Court.
( Vivek Singh Thakur )
December 8, 2021(sd) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:24:12 :::CIS