Chetan Chauhan vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.—This petition u/s 438 Cr. P.C. has been filed for grant of bail in case FIR No. 19 of 2014 dated 14.5.2014 registered at Police Station, New Shimla, under Sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 323 and 506 IPC.

The status report has been filed by the respondent-State.

Briefly stated the case of the prosecution that on 14.5.2014 at about 11.30 A.M. at place Khalini Nalah, the complainant witnessed that five boys are giving severe beatings to Rashiq. One of the boy was carrying Darat in his hands and others were equipped with dandas. When the complainant foiled the attempts of the assailants, then accused inflicted a blow of Darat on the head of the complainant. He lost consciousness. When he was rushed to hospital by Sharad and Manoj, later on he came to know the names of the assailants, who were Balwant, Chetan, Ajay Tekta and Madhu. The matter was reported to the police station, New Shimla and the above FIR was registered and investigating agency swung into action.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General for the State and perused the records of FIR No. 19 of 2014.

Mr. Jagdish Vats, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the other co-accused namely Balwant Singh, Ajay Pal Sharma and Vishal Mehta have already been released on bail and, therefore, the petitioner on the principle of parity, is entitled to be released on bail. This submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is seriously opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General, who has contended that the petitioner is the principal accused in this case and while all the other co-accused were charged with Sections 147, 148 and 149 IPC, the petitioner in addition to these charges, is accused u/s 307 IPC. It is further submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General that there is every possibility of the petitioner misusing his liberty by tampering with the evidence and threatening the prosecution witnesses.

From the records, I find that the investigation in the case is complete and no recoveries are required to be effected. The apprehension of the respondent-State appears to be misconceived at this stage, because it is not that the petitioner is being allowed to go scot-free but is only being released on bail that too, subject to certain stringent conditions one of which is that he will not tamper with the prosecution evidence or threaten the witnesses. Needless to say that the respondent-State is always at liberty to approach this Court in case there is any violation of the bail conditions at the instance of the petitioner. Even otherwise, looking into the nature of the allegations and surrounding circumstances, no case for custodial interrogation can be said to have been made out.

It would not be appropriate for me at this stage to comment upon the merits of the case of the prosecution. Suffice it to say that the petitioner has made out a case for bail. Even otherwise the petitioner is a permanent resident of Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla, H.P. having roots in the society and there is remote chance of his fleeing from justice. Accordingly, the present bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 19 of 2014 dated 14.5.2014 registered at Police Station, New Shimla, under Sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 323 and 506 IPC, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No. 1, Shimla, with the following conditions:

(i) That the petitioner 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(ii) that the petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or threaten the witnesses;

(iii) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when and if required.

(iv) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.

Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. 1, Shimla is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC.VIG/Misc. Instructions/93-IV. 7139 dated 18.3.2013.

Any observation made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove.

Petition stands disposed of.