High CourtsSingle Bench

Kewal Singh @ Chaudhary Ram vs State Of H.P

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 28 February 2023 · Citation: (2023) 02 SHI CK 0057

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 341, 376, 506 · Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(za) a, 3(2) Va, 3(1)(s)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (Main) No. 85 Of 2023
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

15 paragraphs · 821 words

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

1.

Petitioner has moved for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No. 103 of 2022, dated 26.11.2022, registered under Sections 376, 506 & 341 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(za) a, 3(2) Va, 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police Station Shahpur, District Kangra, H.P. Ad-interim protection was granted to the petitioner on 11.01.2023. Status reports have been filed by the respondent.

2.

Status reports and record produced by the respondent show that the FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint. The complainant is a lady, aged 38 years. In her complaint made in October, 2022, she has stated having accompanied the petitioner to his village about six years ago. He made available to her a rented accommodation for her stay in the village. Though, they both resided separately but maintained cordial relations with each other. However, after some time, petitioner’s behaviour with her changed. He started pressurizing the complainant to establish physical relations with him. The complainant alleged her harassment by the petitioner and that she was given frequent beatings by the petitioner and his brother. She also alleged use of objectionable words against her by them. She also levelled allegations that the petitioner and his family members were not allowing her to take water from the hand pump. They were not providing her a passage to go to her land. On the basis of these allegations, FIR was registered against the petitioner on 26. 11.2022.

3.

Investigation into the matter was carried out by the respondent. As per status report, hand pump was meant for public use and is functioning properly. According to the status report, the complainant had never made any similar complaint against the petitioner to the Gram Panchayat. The land owned by the complainant is still standing in her name in the revenue record. During investigation, offences under Sections 341 of IPC and 3(1)(za) of the SC & ST Act were not found to have been committed by the petitioner. Accordingly, these sections were deleted from the FIR. Record produced by the respondent also includes respondent’s earlier report about the complainant having previously preferred umpteenth number of complaints/representations against several villagers in past, which were found to be incorrect during investigation.

4.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, on the basis of instructions imparted to her, states that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is co-operating with the investigating agency. The status report does not even press for custodial investigation of the petitioner. The petitioner is local resident. There is no apprehension of his fleeing from the justice.

5.

In view of the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, the investigation carried out by the respondent so far, the evidence collected by the respondent, coupled with the fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is co-operating with the respondent, I of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a case for confirmation of interim bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.01.2023 is made absolute subject to following conditions:-

(i). The petitioner shall join and cooperate the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law.

(ii). The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever.

(iii). The petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(iv). The petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer.

(v) The petitioner shall not contact, threaten or intimidate the victim/complainant and their family members in any manner whatsoever.

(vi). In case the petitioner is put to trial, then he shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law.

(vii) . Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any.

In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is made clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned Trial Court shall decide the matter without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.