Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Thakur vs State Of H.P on 22 September, 2015
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 1275 of 2015.
.
Date of Decision : 22nd September, 2015
Rajesh Thakur .....Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. .....Respondent.
of
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
rt
For the Petitioner: Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Deputy
Advocate General
_____________________________________________________
Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (Oral)
The bail petitioner is in judicial custody for his having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 201 of the IPC and under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act recorded in FIR No.263/15 of 10.08.2015 registered at Police Station, Dhalli, Tehsil and District Shimla, H.P., hence, the instant bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., has been filed by him for ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:59:52 :::HCHP 2 ordering for his release from judicial custody wherein he is presently lodged.
.
3. Investigating Officer/Inspector/SHO Param Dev is present in Court and has filed a detailed status report.
He has apprised this Court that the bail applicant has uploaded the video clips from his mobile, computer and of from various IP addresses including other electronic devices as exhaustively enumerated in the status report rt filed before this Court. The learned Deputy Advocate General has contended before this Court that the prolongation of the custody of the bail applicant is imperative for effectuating recovery at his instance of the electronic devices wherefrom the video clips at the instance of the bail applicant have been uploaded and in absence whereof the prosecution of the petitioner would not be carried forward. While rejecting the aforesaid submission of the learned Deputy Advocate General, this Court is rather of the view that with the bail applicant extantly suffering judicial custody besides, given the fact that the recovery of the aforesaid items at the instance of the bail petitioner has remained uneffectuated during the period of his police remand rather are untenably ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:59:52 :::HCHP 3 endeavoured to be effected during his judicial custody, it is deemed fit and appropriate that his further judicial .
incarceration ought not to be prolonged merely for non effectuation of recovery at his instance of electronic devices wherefrom the video clips of the victim/complainant have been uploaded by him on the of internet. Even otherwise, predominantly the effecutation of recovery, if any, at his instance of the aforesaid rt electronic devices can be ordered to be endeavoured to be made by the Investigating Officer even when he is ordered to be released from judicial custody.
Consequently, this Court would proceed to order for his release from judicial custody subject to the condition that he shall enable effecutation of recovery at his instance of all electronic devices as well as cell of phone(s) wherefrom he uploaded the video clips of the complainant/victim on the internet unless they stand not destroyed, in event of destruction whereof an adverse inference shall be drawn against him. However, in case the bail applicant omits to, in the aforesaid manner render cooperation to the Investigating Officer, this order shall stand automatically vacated and it shall be open to the Investigating Officer to ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:59:52 :::HCHP 4 take the bail applicant into custody. Moreover, what constrains this Court to grant the indulgence of bail to the .
bail applicant is the fact that no material has been placed on record by the prosecution portraying that in the event of bail being granted to the bail petitioner, there is every likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering with of prosecution evidence, as a sequel, then, the bail petitioner is entitled to the indulgence of bail. Consequently, the rt present bail application is allowed and the indulgence of bail is granted to the bail applicant subject to compliance of the following conditions:-
(i) that the bail applicant shall furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, H.P.;
(ii) that the bail applicant shall join the investigation, as and when required by the Investigating Agency;
(iii) that he shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:59:52 :::HCHP 5 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
.
(iv) that he shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court ;
(v) that he shall deposit his passport(s), if any, with the SHO, Police Station concerned;
of
(vi) That the bail applicant shall enable the effecutation at his instance recovery of all electronic devices as well as cell phone(s) rt wherefrom he uploaded the video clips of the complainant/victim on the internet unless they are not destroyed. In case the bail applicant omits to render cooperation to the Investigating Officer in the above regard, this order shall stand vacated automatically and it shall be open to the Investigating Officer to take the bail applicant into custody
4. With the aforesaid observations the present petitions stand disposed of. It is, however, made clear that the findings recorded hereinabove will have no bearing on the merits of the case.
Dasti Copy.
(Sureshwar Thakur) 22 nd September, 2015. Judge.
(jai) ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:59:52 :::HCHP