Himachal Pradesh High Court
Lot Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 14 July, 2015
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA
.
Cr.M.P(M) No. 839 of 2015
Decided on : 14.7.2015
Lot Ram .....Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ....Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev K Suri, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Deputy Advocate
General.
Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)
The instant petition has been instituted by the bail petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C, for grant of anticipatory bail to him as he apprehends his arrest, for his having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 468, 471, 120(B) I.P.C, recorded in case FIR No. 25/15 of 28.4.2015, registered at Police Station, H.P CID Shimla.
2. Inspector Rajinder Chauhan, Inspector Lal Singh, SI Chet Ram and ASI Chet Ram, P.S CID Shimla are present in 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:34:23 :::HCHP...2...
Court and have apprised this Court that the land owned by the .
bail petitioner is minimal and would not stand as a collateral security for the amount of loan as disbursed in his favour. The investigation into the offence allegedly committed by the bail petitioner is in progress. However, given the submission of the learned Counsel of the petitioner that the bail petitioner shall within three months refund to the Bank concerned the entire amount of loan disbursed in his favour, as such when the ends of justice would be met in case his submission is accepted, consequently, his submission is accepted. Accordingly while accepting the submission aforesaid the custodial interrogation of the bail petitioner is deemed not necessary. Moreover, when at this stage no material has been placed on record by the prosecution demonstrating that in the event of bail being granted to the bail petitioner, there is every likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution evidence, this Court is constrained to afford the facility of bail in favour of the bail petitioner. Accordingly, the indulgence of bail is granted to the bail petitioner and the order rendered on 22.6.2015 is confirmed on the following conditions:-
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:34:23 :::HCHP...3...
.
1. That the bail applicant shall on or before 31.10.2015 defray to the bank concerned the entire amount of loan disbursed in his favour. In case the bail applicant omits to do so then the order affording the facility of anticipatory bail to him shall stands vacated forthwith and the bail
2.
r to applicant shall be taken into custody.
That he shall join the investigation, as and when required by the Investigating agency;
3. 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 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police;
4. That he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
5. That he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Police Station, concerned;
6. That in case of violation of any of the conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be forfeited and he shall be liable to be taken into custody;
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:34:23 :::HCHP...4...
7. That he shall apply for bail afresh when the challan .
is filed before the trial Court.
3. In view of above, petition stands disposed of. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide Dasti Copy.
r to the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.
14th July, 2015 ( Sureshwar Thakur ),
(priti) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:34:23 :::HCHP