Antaryami vs State Of H.P

Virender Singh, J

Applicant-Antaryami, has filed the present bail application, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.PC’), for releasing him, on bail in case F.I.R. No. 01/2023, dated 18.01.2023, registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), with Women Police Station Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.

According to the applicant, he has been arrested in the said false case at the instance of the complainant. According to him, complainant and applicant are known to each through school days and after so many years, they are again in touch with each other, through, social media and become friends. The FIR, in question, is stated to be lodged by the complainant to ruin the career of the applicant with some ulterior motive, to grab the money.

According to him, he is in the judicial custody since 09.01.2023 and the investigation in this case is almost complete. The applicant is stated to be of the age of 32 years and Government employee, working as Clerk in the Excise and Taxation Department and as such, having deep roots in the society.

On the basis of averments made in the application, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, has given certain undertakings, for which the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, he is released on bail.

On all these submissions, a prayer has been made to release him on bail.

When put to notice, the police has filed status report, disclosing therein, that the complainant aged about 33 years, appeared before the police along with her husband on 08.01.2023, by moving the application disclosing therein that she is residing with her husband and got in touch with the accused (applicant) through social media. The accused used to forward objectionable messages to her and thereafter, started blackmailing her on the pretext that he is having her photographs and recording and threatened the complainant to meet him and thereafter took her to a hotel near Tanda, where, the complainant has been ravished by the accused. On the basis of the above facts, the request has been made to take action against accused.

Upon the said complaint, the Police registered the FIR in question and police machinery swung into motion. The complainant/prosecutrix was medico-legally examined and request for CAF and CDR has been made. The accused is stated to be arrested on 09.01.2023 from his residence and he was also medico-legally examined. The Police has conducted the other investigations and according to the stand taken in the status report, the accused and the prosecutrix had studied together till 10+2 and from September, 2022 both of them are again in touch, with each other, through social media. On 06.01.2023, when, the prosecutrix had gone to Tanda hospital, after seeking of permission of her husband, then, accused telephoned her and threatened her to come otherwise, he will circulate the photos and videos. Thereafter, the accused allegedly took her to a hotel at Tanda road and ravished her. Lastly, it has been stated that the accused is in judicial custody and the investigation is still undergoing.

On these submissions, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application.

Heard.

The prosecutrix, as per the status report, of 33 years of age, whereas accused, as mentioned in the bail application, is 32 years of age. As such, there is nothing on the file to doubt that they were not studying together and lateron came into contact with each other through social media. The role, allegedly played by the accused, as alleged by the complainant/prosecutrix, is yet to be proved during the trial and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in the judicial custody for indefinite period. Presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant and bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as the pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law.

At the time of deciding the bail application, detailed discussion about the prosecution case should be avoided, as the same may cause prejudice to the case of prosecution or to the accused.

The accused is local resident and may be available during trial.

There is nothing in the status report or argued before the Court that the custodial interrogation of the accused is required by the police.

Considering all these facts, this Court of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.

The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case F.I.R. No. 01 of 2023, dated 08.01.2023, registered under Sections 376 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code, with Police Women Station Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Dharamshala/JMFC, Dharamshala or Duty Magistrate, Dharamshala at Kangra. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:-

a) He shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application;

b) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;

c) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or Police Officer, and

d) He shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.

Any observations, made herein above, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on merits of the case, as, these observations are confirmed only to the disposal of the present bail application.

It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found to be violated by the applicant.

The applicant may produce a downloaded copy of the order passed by this Court before the trial Court and the trial Court shall not insist for the certified copy of the order, rather passing of order can be verified to the official web-page of this Court.