Himachal Pradesh High Court
Malkiat Singh vs State Of H.P on 1 June, 2015
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 614 of 2015.
Date of decision: 1/6/2015.
.
Malkiat Singh Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. Respondent.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Whether approved for reporting?1.
For the petitioner:
r Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Dy. A.G.
Sureshwar Thakur, J. (oral)
The instant application has been filed by the bail applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., for his being released from judicial custody wherein he is instantly lodged for his having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 376, 342, 356, 201 read with Section 34 IPC recorded in F.I.R. No.322 of 2014 registered at Police Station Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.
2. The prosecutrix is a major. Both the prosecutrix and one Chandravati booked a room in hotel Sidharath in 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP 2District Kullu. On 2.10.2014 both checked into their allotted suite in the aforesaid hotel. Moreover, the accused and another person named Santosh Patiyal on the same day .
booked and also occupied a room in the very same hotel.
However, at night the bail applicant ingressed into the room occupied by Chandravati and the prosecutrix. His ingression into the room occupied by Chandravati and the prosecutrix led Chandravati to join the company of one Santosh Patiyal.
During night r the bail applicant stayed alongwith the prosecutrix. On the succeeding day both were seen together rejoicing in Kullu fair at Kullu. Both separated from each other on 3.10.2014. The F.I.R. qua the incident was belatedly lodged on 9.10.2014. The imprompt lodging of the F.I.R at the instance of the prosecutrix would render an inference of hers having consensually succumbed to the sexual overtures of the bail applicant. However, the prosecutrix has afforded an explanation for her succumbing to the sexual overtures of the bail applicant under duress or compulsion emanating from the fact of the bail applicant having purportedly clicked her photographs and under threat of their dissemination his having subjected her to sexual intercourse. Nonetheless the said fact is dispelled by the status report disclosing that on an ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP 3 analysis by the CFSL of the mobile/cell phone of the bail applicant it has omitted to divulge that it carries any obscene photographs of the prosecutrix. In face of falsity of the .
pretext projected by the prosecutrix for hers succumbing to the sexual overtures of the bail applicant, the obvious inference is that the purported sexual intercourse interse the bail applicant and the prosecutrix, which occurred on 2.10.2014, is wholly consensual. Consequently, this Court holds with formidability that the prosecutrix is prima facie constituting false allegations against the bail applicant.
3. At this stage, the learned Deputy Advocate General submits that three criminal cases are pending against the bail applicant in various courts. Consequently, he submits that in face of repeated and successive indulgence of the bail applicant in criminal activities, the according of facility of bail in his favour, may not be appropriate as there is every likelihood of his influencing the prosecution witnesses in other cases pending against him and also re-indulging in commission of offences.
4. Even though the factum of repeated and successive indulgence of the bail applicant in criminal activities and besides the factum of criminal cases pending against him is a ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP 4 necessary factor to be borne in mind when according or refusing the facility of bail to him. However, in view of the mandate enshrined in Maulana Mohammed Amir Rashadi .
vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another (2012) 2 SCC 382 wherein it has been enshrined that strict/stringent conditions can be imposed by this Court to obviate the factum of the bail applicant fleeing from justice or influencing witnesses. The imposition of such conditions would also mitigate as well as allay the apprehension of the State that given his previous repeated indulgence in criminal activities he in case is granted bail would abuse his bail and re-indulge in criminal activities.
Consequently, this Court to allay the apprehension of the respondent that there is likelihood of his influencing the witnesses as well as his again indulging in criminal activities, proceeds to afford the facility of the bail to the bail applicant subject to the following conditions. If any condition of is infringed, it shall facilitate the respondents to move this Court for cancellation of bail of the bail applicant. The conditions are:
(i) That he shall furnish one personal and two surety bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP 5 to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu;
(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 advance any threat, inducement or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(iv) That he shall not leave India without the permission of the Court.
(v) That he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Police Station concerned;
(vi) That in case of reindulgence of the bail applicant in criminal activities, it shall be open to the State to move for cancellation of the bail.
(vii) That in case an intimation is received by the State that the bail applicant is influencing the witnesses in criminal cases pending against him then it shall be open for the state for apply for cancellation of the bail.
With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. It is, however, made clear ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP 6 that the findings recorded hereinabove will have no bearing on the merits of the case.
Dasti copy.
.
1st June, 2015. (Sureshwar Thakur)
™ Judge.
r to
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:18:45 :::HCHP