Mithun Shah vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J

The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of bail in case

FIR No. 40/2020, dated 05.10.2020, under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Women Police Station Baddi,

District Solan, H.P.

As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he is neither in a

position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the

bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 05.10.2020, father of the prosecutrix filed a complaint against the petitioner, alleging

therein that on 04.10.2020, when he and his wife were not present at their house, the petitioner came there and subjected the prosecutrix (name

withheld) to forcible sexual intercourse without her consent. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, FIR No. 40/2020, dated 05.10.2020, under Sections

376 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, came to be registered against the petitioner. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the

petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a heinous crime and there is possibility that in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail,

he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and also flee from justice.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the

police report(s), carefully.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been implicated in this case. He has further argued that the

petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and no fruitful purpose will be served by

keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has argued that keeping in view the material, which has come on record, and also the

age of the petitioner and that of the prosecutrix, the bail application be allowed.

Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a heinous offence, so at this stage, in case

he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the

petitioner be dismissed.

At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner and that of the prosecutrix, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have occurred, the fact

that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than eight months, the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution

evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions of bail, if granted. So considering the overall

facts, which have come on record, and without discussing them at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an

unlimited period, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in

his favour. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No.

40/2020, dated 05.10.2020, under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Women Police Station Baddi, District

Solan, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith, in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `25,000/Â (rupees twenty five

thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:

(i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required.

(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(iii) That the petitioner will 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 Investigating Officer or Court.

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

Copy dasti.