Pawan Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking bail in case FIR No. 38 of 2022, dated 13.2.2022, registered in Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P. under Sections 376 of IPC.

Status Report stands filed and record has also been made available.

As per Status report, on 13.2.2022, 25 years old victim, alongwith relatives, submitted a complaint, complaining therein that petitioner had been exploiting her physically since last four years with false promise to marry, who had come in her contact in the year 2017 while she was serving in Goyal Motors, Paonta Sahib in Service Customer Cell, as petitioner had contacted her telephonically and had started talking with her on one pretext or other and one day after asking about caste of victim, he had expressed his intention to marry her by saying that he was also of the same caste. In this way, they continued to talk for about one month. On 16.9.2017, on the birthday of petitioner, he called victim to meet him in the park where from, in his car, petitioner took her to Motal Hotel at Dakrani and checked-in a room and celebrated birthday by cutting a cake and thereafter by saying, that he would marry her, asked for promise not to refuse his demand and ultimately despite refusal by the victim, developed physical relation with her and thereafter continued to do the same. It has been further stated in the complaint that after getting job as driver in H.P. Public Service Commission, Shimla in June, 2019, petitioner started maintaining distance from her, but whenever he used to come from Shimla to Paonta, he used to call her and to have physical relations. Like this on 1.2.2020 also he called her at Badripur Chowk and at that time victim has asked petitioner to solemnize marriage at the earliest, whereupon petitioner replied in affirmative and took her in his Car to Brighten Hotel, Moginand Paonta and made physical relations with her. Thereafter, in January 2021 in Customary Caste Panchayat petitioner had agreed to solemnize engagement ceremony in April, 2021 and to solemnize marriage on some auspicious beginning (muhoort), but petitioner did not keep his promise which resulted to filing of complaint on 20.6.2021 against the petitioner in Police Station, Paonta.

On summoning by the Police, initially petitioner refused to marry, but on solicitation by the Police, he agreed to marry in December, 2021, but since July till date of filing of complaint, petitioner did not talk with her, rather on 15.10.2021 under intoxication of liquor petitioner came and abused family of victim and challenged to do whatever victim would like. Further that on 3.2.2022, petitioner was summoned in the Police Station, where petitioner, in front of SHO, had promised to come on 7.2.2022 to solemnize marriage, but had not come, rather said that earlier he had come to Ponta but it was her turn to come to Shimla. On the basis of complaint, FIR was registered. Statement of victim was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paonta Sahib. Photocopies of record from hotels referred in the complaint were also seized by the Police. In the meanwhile, petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in present petition and thereafter petitioner had joined the investigation.

Petitioner has also placed on record Daily Diary No. 16, dated 16. 10.2021, wherein petitioner has reported to the Police about his deep intensive friendship with victim and compromise arrived at between them on 23. 1.2021 in the house of Rakesh Kumar Ex Pradhan, Gondpur to solemnize engagement in April, 2021 and to solemnize marriage thereafter on an auspicious beginning (muhroot). According to this report, victim and her family was not coming forward to solemnize engagement and marriage of petitioner with the victim. Petitioner, who was present in the Court, had also expressed his willingness to marry complainant.

Supplementary status report has also been filed by SHO Paonta Sahib, stating therein that during investigation victim and petitioner/accused were summoned in the Police Station and were made to sit together to resolve dispute between them and thereafter victim had made a statement that she is ready to solemnize marriage in April, 2022 on an auspicious beginning (muhoot), but for that petitioner has to come to her house alongwith his parents with Barat. Whereas, petitioner has expressed that his parents have disinherited him and as such he is alone in his family and is not able to bring Barat, but ready to solemnize marriage in the Court, whereupon suggestion was given to the victim by the Police that in case she really intended to marry petitioner, then she could solemnize marriage during succeeding week on any working day in the Court, for which petitioner was ready, but victim had refused for that stating that she wanted that petitioner should come to marry her in a Barat and her marriage should be solemnized with great pomp and show by her parents.

Here is a case where victim is saying that petitioner is not ready to solemnize marriage, whereas petitioner is expressing his inability to have consent and presence of his parents for his disinheritance by his father, notice whereof has also been published in newspaper, but petitioner is ready to solemnize Court marriage, but victim is not ready for that.

Keeping in view the entire material placed before me, in peculiar circumstances of the case, I find that it is a fit case for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of 30,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Sessions Judge, Nahan, within three weeks from today and upon such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court, including the conditions enumerated hereinafter, so as to ensure presence of the petitioner at the time of trial:-

(i) That the petitioner shall join the investigation and attend the Court as and when directed to do so by the Investigating Agency/Court;

(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/her from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) that the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial;

(iv) that the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected;

(v) that the petitioner shall not misuse her liberty in any manner;

(vi) that the petitioner shall not jump over the bail;

(vii) that he shall keep on informing about the change in address, landline number and/or mobile number, if any, for their availability to Police and/or during trial;

(viii) he shall not leave India without permission of the Court.

It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing and/or to the trial Court to impose any other condition on the petitioner, enlarged on bail, as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and thereupon, it will also be open to the trial Court to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice.

In case the petitioner violates any conditions imposed upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail, in accordance with law.

Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc. Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013.

Observations made in this petition hereinbefore shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly confined for the disposal of the bail application.

The petitioner is permitted to produce copy of order downloaded from the High Court website and trial Court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however, he may verify the order from the High Court website or otherwise.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.