Himachal Pradesh High Court
Puran Chand Son Of Shri Khub Ram vs State Of H.P. ....Non-Applicant on 1 July, 2015
Author: P.S. Rana
Bench: P.S. Rana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 721 of 2015
Order Reserved on 18th June 2015
.
Date of Order 1st July, 2015
________________________________________________________
Puran Chand son of Shri Khub Ram ....Applicant
Versus
State of H.P. ....Non-Applicant
________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.S. Rana, J.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
__________________________________________________________ For the Applicant: Ms. Jyotsana Rewal Dua, Advocate.
For the Non-applicant: Mr.M.L.Chauhan, Additional
Advocate General with
Mr.J.S.Rana, Assistant
Advocate General.
P.S. Rana, Judge.
Order:- Present bail application is filed under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 74 of 2015 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 2dated 18.5.2015 registered under Sections 353, 332 read with Section 34 IPC at P.S. Manali District Kullu (H.P.)
2. It is pleaded that applicant is President of Him .
Anchal Taxi Operator Manali. It is pleaded that applicant is innocent and applicant has been falsely implicated in present case. It is further pleaded that investigation of present case is completed and applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence. It is pleaded that applicant is not previous convict and applicant will cooperate in trial of the case and any condition imposed by Court will be complied by applicant. Prayer for acceptance of anticipatory bail sought.
3. Per contra police report filed. As per police report on dated 18.5.2015 complainant C.Parvesh Kumar No. 392 Third IRBN Pandoh District Mandi H.P. and C.Suresh Kumar No.302 and C.Lalit No. 393 were on traffic duty at place Kothi and were checking the vehicles proceeding from Manali to Rohtang. There is recital in police report that at about 7.15 AM vehicle having registration No. HP-33T-8247 came, which was directed to stop. There is further recital in police report that complainant requested the applicant to park the vehicle ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 3 upon one side of the road and thereafter driver of vehicle and 3-4 persons travelling in the vehicle came outside the vehicle and beaten the complainant with legs and fist .
blows and also torn two buttons of official dress and also torn jacket of complainant. There is further recital in police report that complainant sustained injuries upon his mouth and nose. There is further recital in police report that thereafter accused persons fled away from the spot in the vehicle. There is also recital in police report that case was registered. There is recital in police report that thereafter investigation was conducted and site plan was prepared. There is also recital in police report that photographs obtained and torn dress of complainant and jacket also took into possession vide seizure memo. There is also recital in police report that applicant Puran Chand had violated the direction of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal and also obstructed the public official from discharging his duty. There is recital in police report that applicant has participated in the investigation of case on dated 12th, 14th, 15th and 16th June 2015. Prayer for rejection of bail application sought, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 4
4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the non-applicant and also .
perused the record.
5. Following points arise for determination in this bail application:-
1. Whether anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by applicant is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of bail application?
r 2. Final Order.
Findings on Point No.1
6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of applicant that applicant is innocent and applicant did not commit any criminal offence cannot be decided at this stage. Same fact will be decided when case shall be disposed of on merits after giving due opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence in support of their case.
7. Another submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that applicant will join the investigation and any condition imposed by Court ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 5 will be binding upon the applicant and on this ground anticipatory bail application be allowed is accepted for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. At the time of granting .
bail following factors are considered. (i) Nature and seriousness of offence (ii) The character of the evidence
(iii) Circumstances which are peculiar to the accused (iv) Possibility of the presence of the accused at the trial or investigation (v) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with (vi) The larger interests of the public or the State. See AIR 1978 SC 179 titled Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State (Delhi Administration). Also see AIR 1962 SC 253 titled The State Vs. Captain Jagjit Singh. It was held in case reported in 2012 Cri. L.J. 702 Apex Court DB 702, titled Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial. It was held that grant of bail is the rule and committal to jail is exceptional. It was held that refusal of bail is a restriction on personal liberty of individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. There is recital in police report that applicant has joined the investigation of case on 12th, 14th, 15th and 16th June 2015.
There is no recital in police report that custodial ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 6 interrogation of applicant is required in present case. It is well settled law that accused is presumed to be innocent till convicted by competent Court of law. Court is of the .
opinion that it is expedient in the ends of justice to allow the application filed by applicant. Court is of the opinion that if anticipatory bail is granted to applicant then interest of general public and State shall not be adversely affected.
8. Submission of learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-applicant that if anticipatory bail is granted to applicant then applicant will induce, threat and influence the prosecution witnesses and on this ground bail application be declined is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. Court is of the opinion that conditional anticipatory bail will be granted to applicant and if applicant will flout the terms and conditions of anticipatory bail order then prosecution will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail strictly in accordance with law. In view of the fact that applicant has participated in investigation of case as per report of the police it is expedient in the ends of justice to allow the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP 7 anticipatory bail application. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in affirmative.
Point No.2 (Final Order) .
9. In view of my findings on point No.1 bail application filed by applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and interim order dated 8.6.2015 is made absolute. Observations made in this order will not effect the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the disposal of bail application filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. All pending application(s) if any also disposed of. Bail petition filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure stands disposed of.
(P.S.Rana),
July 01 ,2015(ms) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:28:34 :::HCHP