Ashok Rana vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in FIR No. 59 of 2014,

dated 20.05.2014, registered under Sections 498Â​A, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Bhawarna, District Kangra, H.P.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he is guilty of murdering Ms. Vandana in the month of February, 2010, whom he had married in the

month of February, 2009.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since the year 2014. The trial is at the stage of final arguments,

as the statement of petitioner under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stands recorded. He further states that at this stage, no purpose is

going to the achieved by detaining the petitioner in custody, as he has already suffered a lot on account of his being in custody for almost six years. He

submits that the evidence which has come on record demonstrates that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged against him and there is every

possibility of his being acquitted on merit. He further submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Himachal Pradesh and he has instructions to

submit that in case the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, then he shall not leave the territory of State of Himachal Pradesh without the leave

of the Court. He further submits that as the trial is at the stage of final arguments, which presently stands deferred on account of COVIDÂ19

pandemic, the custody of the petitioner is otherwise also not required and if released on bail, there is no possibility of his stalling the process of free

and fair trial, especially as statements of prosecutions witnesses stand recorded. Accordingly, he prays that taking into consideration the peculiar facts

of the case, where the petitioner is languishing in custody for the last almost six years, this petition be allowed and the petitioner be ordered to be

released on bail, on such conditions, as the Court deems fit.

Learned Additional Advocate General while opposing the bail petition, has submitted that taking into consideration the gravity of the offence alleged

against the petitioner, this bail petition deserves to be dismissed. He has argued that the evidence which has come during the course of trial, duly

establishes the guilty of the petitioner and now as the matter is at the stage of arguments, it will be desirable in case this petition is dismissed and the

verdict of learned Trial Court is awaited. On this count, he has opposed the release of petitioner on bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the status report filed by the State.

No doubt, the petitioner is facing trial for having committed offences under Sections 498ÂA, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, yet it remains a

fact that he is in police custody since the year, 2014. It is not in dispute that the statements of prosecution witnesses stand recorded and further the

statement of the petitioner has also been recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned Trial Court. That being so,

there is merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that as of now, custody of the petitioner is not going to serve any purpose, as he no

more can influence the witnesses or create any hurdle in the conduct of free and fair trial. Further, taking into consideration the fact that the trial is at

the stage of final hearing, in my considered view, it will be in the interest of justice to allow this bail petition by releasing the petitioner on bail by

imposing stringent conditions upon him, in view of the fact that the petitioner is in custody since the year 2014.

At this stage, learned Additional Advocate General submits that if the petitioner is released on bail, the same will be used as a tool by the petitioner

to delay the final hearing of the trial. This apprehension of learned Additional Advocate General shall be taken care of by the Court in the conditions

which are going to be imposed upon the petitioner.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 59 of 2014, dated 20.05.2014, registered under

Sections 498ÂA, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Bhawarna, District Kangra, H.P., subject to his furnishing bail bond in the

sum of rupees Two Lacs with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate 1st

Class, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P.

The petitioner shall also abide by the following conditions:

“(a) He shall 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; and

(b) He shall reside at his present address till the completion of Trial and change of address will not be permitted without the leave of the Court.

The statement of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, that the petitioner shall not leave the territory of State of Himachal

Pradesh till the trial is over, is taken on record and it is further observed that in case unnecessary dates are sought on behalf of the petitioner to argue

the trial finally, then also the State shall also be at liberty to approach this Court for the purpose of cancellation of bail.

It is clarified that the findings which have been returned by this Court while deciding this petition are only for the purpose of adjudication of the

present bail application and learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the findings so returned by this Court in the adjudication of this

petition during trial of the case. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner does not comply with the conditions which have been imposed upon him

while granting the present bail, the State shall be at liberty to approach this Court for the cancellation of bail.

Copy dasti.