High CourtsSingle Bench

Jai Parkash vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 3 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 SHI CK 0019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 1909 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

26 paragraphs · 572 words

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

1.

Status report filed, which is ordered to be taken on record. By way of this petition, filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code,

petitioner has prayed for his enlargement on bail, in FIR No.04 of 2020, dated 14.02.2020, registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, at Women Police Station Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner is not guilty of the offences alleged against him and the First Information Report stands

lodged against him, because there are some financial disputes between him and father of the victim, as a result of which, the petitioner has been

falsely implicated in this case. He has also submitted that the material which has been collected in the course of investigation also suggests that the

allegations leveled against the petitioner are incorrect and he is not guilty of the offences alleged against him. Accordingly, he has prayed that this

petition be allowed and petitioner be ordered to be released on bail.

3.

Opposing the bail petition, learned Additional Advocate General argued that the age of the victim happens to be 14 years and the material which has

been collected in the course of investigation clearly points out towards the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence and further

the investigation does not points to the theory being propagated by the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in the matter on account of some

financial issues, which are there between him and father of the victim. Accordingly, he prays that this petition be dismissed.

4.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having gone through the status report as well as the order which was passed by the Court of learned

Special Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., while dismissing a similar application, filed by present petitioner, under Section 439 of the Criminal

Procedure Code, on 13.10.2020, titled as Jai Prakash versus State of Himachal Pradesh, this Court is of the view that present petition deserves to be

dismissed.

5.

The First Information Report, which has been lodged against the petitioner, stands registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The age of the victim is stated to be 14 years. A perusal of the investigation

report demonstrates that in the course of his interrogation, the petitioner had in fact confessed his guilt. What is the veracity of the said confession is

not for this Court to see, but it is apt to observe that as the victim was 14 years old when alleged offence was committed and stage of the case is that

only the challan has been filed as of now, in my considered view, release of the petitioner, at this stage, will adversely affect the trial, because there is

each and every possibility that the petitioner may try to win over the prosecution witnesses or try to coerce and threaten them. Further, the release of

the petitioner shall also have adversely affect the victim, who happens to be 14 years old minor girl.

6.

In this view of the matter, this Court does not finds the present to be a fit case to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this bail petition is

dismissed at this stage.