Hari Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Satyen Vaidya, J

Petitioner is an accused in case FIR No. 59 of 2021, dated 16.11.2021, registered at Police Station, Shillai, District Sirmaur, H.P. under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC.

By way of instant petition, petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail in the above noted case, on the grounds that a false case has been foisted against him and other co-accused by the complainant with ulterior motives. As per petitioner, complainant is brother-in-law (sister’s husband) of co-accused Ram Lal. Co-accused Ram Lal and his wife had borrowed money from the complainant. Final settlement was entered into on 20.07.2020 between co-accused Ram Lal and his wife on one side and complainant on the other. The settlement was finalized in presence of Atma Ram, a brother of the co-accused Ram Lal. The complainant had acknowledged the receipt of entire balance amount due from the co-accused Ram Lal and his wife in presence of petitioner and Balbir Singh as witnesses. Receipt was executed which was scribed by Atma Ram and was duly signed by the complainant in presence of aforesaid witnesses. Complainant was in possession of certain blank cheques signed by co-accused Ram Lal and his wife, which he had promised not to use after final settlement. The complainant, however, used these cheques and filed complaints against the co-accused Ram Lal and his wife under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Complainant also filed complaints with police by denying his signatures on receipt dated 20.07.2020. Police on inquiry found the dispute between the parties having civil overture. Complainant finally filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Shillai, seeking direction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C for registration of case. The case was accordingly registered. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that investigation has already been completed. All other co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 8.3.2022 and 22.07.2022 respectively. It is submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has no connection with the alleged incident and has been falsely implicated in the case. Nothing is required to be recovered from the petitioner. He is permanent resident of Village Bhapil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, H.P. He has already joined the investigation as and when required. In case the petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, he shall not interfere in the investigation in any manner and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. Petitioner has undertaken to abide by all the conditions as may be imposed against him.

In response, the status report has been filed. It is revealed that dispute has been raised by the complainant with respect to genuineness of the receipt dated 20.07.2020 claimed by the co-accused Ram Lal and his wife to have been executed by the complainant. It is stated that all the accused including bail petitioner have associated themselves in investigation as and when required. During investigation, the police is also stated to have come across the facts as narrated in the bail petition. The police has already received the opinion of GEQD in respect of receipt dated 20.7.2020. It is alleged that some over-writing is there, which is being further investigated.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Deputy Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State and have also gone through the record carefully.

The dispute is with respect to the discharge of outstanding liability of the co-accused Ram Lal and his wife in favour of complainant. Whereas on one hand the said liability is stated to have been completely discharged vide writing/receipt dated 20.07.2020, on the other the complainant has specifically denied having received the amount from the co-accused Ram Lal and his wife, as mentioned in the receipt dated 20.07.2020. The complainant has denied execution of such receipt and has categorically denied his signature thereon.

The police has already undertaken entire preliminary investigation. The questioned document i.e. receipt dated 20.07.2020 had been sent for opinion of GEQD and the report has been received. The allegations and counter allegations are to be proved during the trial of the case. Nothing is left to be recovered from the bail petitioner. The police has not asked for custodial interrogation of the bail petitioner. Even otherwise, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a case where the custodial interrogation may be necessary. No fruitful purpose shall be served by keeping the bail petitioner in custody. Pre-trial incarceration is not the Rule.

The petitioner is permanent resident of Village Bhapil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, H.P. and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from the course of justice. There is no apparent apprehension of the petitioner tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is not a case of the respondent that in case of release of petitioner on bail, the trial of the case shall be adversely affected.

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with case FIR No. 59 of 2021 dated 16.11.2021 registered at Police Station, Shillai, District Sirmour, H.P. under Section 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, he shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer. This order shall be subject to the following conditions: -

i) That the petitioner shall continue to join investigation as and when required.

ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police.

iii) That the petitioner shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence.

iv) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

Any observations made herein above 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 observations made herein above.

Petition stands disposed of.