Manish Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this petition, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, a prayer has been made for release of the petitioner on

bail, in F.I.R. No.164 of 2020, dated 10.11.2020, registered against him at Police Station Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 376 and 506 of

the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (ii) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The FIR in issue has been lodged against the petitioner by the prosecutrix, on the ground that she was resident of Village and Post Office Chalvada,

Tehsil Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. and in the year 2012-13 she came in contact with the accused, who befriended her while she was undergoing

course in ITI. According to her, the accused allured her by stating that he loved her and wanted to marry her. He established physical relations with

her by alluring her for marriage. In the year 2019 the prosecutrix disclosed to the petitioner that she belongs to Scheduled Caste category and hails

from a poor family, upon which she was assured by the petitioner that he had already talked with his parents and they had agreed for their marriage.

On this pretext also, according to the prosecutrix, the petitioner established physical relations with her. Thereafter, the petitioner went abroad and

continued assuring the prosecutrix that he will marry her. However, later on, he rescinded from his promise on the ground of the caste of the

prosecutrix, which led to lodging of the FIR. The petitioner was arrested on 11.11.2020 and since then he is in custody.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations which have been leveled against the petitioner are false and he is not guilty of the

offences alleged against him. He has further submitted that as of now the investigation in the case is complete, challan already stands filed before the

competent Court of Law and charges also stand framed against the petitioner. Therefore, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, as no

recovery etc. is now to be made from the petitioner, no purpose is going to be served by detaining him in custody and accordingly, he has prayed that

the petitioner be ordered to be released on bail.

Opposing the bail petition, learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that taking into consideration the gravity of the offences alleged

against the petitioner, this petition be dismissed because there is each and every possibility that if released on bail, the petitioner may try to influence

the outcome of the trial by trying to coerce or influence the witnesses.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the status report as well as other documents placed on record. I have also perused

order dated 04.01.2021, passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. in Bail Application No.90-

J/XXII/2020, titled as Manish Kumar Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh, vide which a similar application filed by the petitioner stood dismissed.

A perusal of the order passed by learned Court below demonstrates that primarily learned Court below dismissed the bail application at that stage,

inter alia, on the ground that as the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code was also alleged against the petitioner, therefore, it would be

in the interest of justice to consider the prayer of the accused for grant of bail, if any, after the investigation was complete.

Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that investigation is complete and after filing of the challan, the charges stand framed against the petitioner and

now the matter is listed for recording statements of the prosecution witnesses before the Court of learned Special Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P., on 30.07.2021.

In these circumstances, it is but natural that now no recovery etc. is to be effected from the petitioner. As far as apprehensions expressed by

learned Additional Advocate General are concerned, the same can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions upon the petitioner and further by

granting leave to the State that in case petitioner violates any of the conditions so imposed upon him by the Court, then the State shall be at liberty to

move an application, praying for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed, as prayed for and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in case F.I.R. No.164 of 2020, dated 10.11.2020,

registered against him at Police Station Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (ii) (v) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one

surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner 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;

ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

iii) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case; and

(iv) He shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court.

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 the trial of the case. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner does not complies 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 the bail. The petition stands disposed of in the

above terms.

Copy dasti.