Pravinder Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Satyen Vaidya, J

Petitioner is an accused in case FIR No. 29/2021, dated 03.08.2021, registered at Women Police Station, Solan, H.P., under Sections 363, 366, 376

& 506 of the Indian Penal Code IPC and Section 4 of POCSO, Act.

Petitioner is in custody since 06.08.2021. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant bail petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in the

above noted case, on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The investigation has been completed and no recovery has

to be affected from him. He has old parents to look after and is the sole bread earner of the family. No legal evidence is there to connect the

petitioner with the alleged offences. Petitioner belongs to a respectable family and he shall not abscond from the course of justice. He is ready and

willing to join investigation. Petitioner has undertaken not to tamper with the prosecution evidence and to abide by all the conditions as may be imposed

upon him.

At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the victim and her family as well as the petitioner and his family, have

agreed for solemnization of marriage between the petitioner and the victim. The case was registered at the instance of the father of the victim due to

misunderstanding of facts. The parties, in fact, have now settled all issues inter se. The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. being Cr.MMO No. 663

of 2021 has been filed in this Court seeking quashing of FIR.

In response, the respondent has filed status report and has stated that on 03.08.2021, the father of the victim lodged a report at Women Police

Station, Solan, alleging that the petitioner had sexually assaulted his minor daughter (victim) between 27.07.2021 to 31.07.2021. It was also alleged that

the victim was kidnapped with the intent to marry her and was taken by the petitioner to his native village in Kinnaur. With the help of police, the

complainant and his wife could trace the victim from the native place of the petitioner. During investigation, however, police could not find any

corroborative scientific evidence. On completion of investigation, the challan has been filed in the Court on 30. 09.2021. As far as, the contention of

learned counsel for the petitioner that Cr.MMO No.663 of 2021 has been filed seeking quashing of FIR, has not been specifically denied by the

respondent.

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and have also perused the status report as also the

police file produced at the time of arguments.

It is not the case of the respondentÂState that the petitioner was stranger to the victim and was not known to her prior to 27.07.2021. Even from

the version of the victim, as made out from her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., it could not be inferred that the petitioner was not known to

her previously. The circumstances of the case suggest that the petitioner and the victim intended to marry each other. The minority of victim was the

impediment. The fact that the petitioner had taken the victim to his native place and had got her introduced to her parents as well as near relations,

suggests that the intent of the petitioner was not to exploit the victim but to marry her.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that as a subsequent event, there has been a compromise/settlement between the parties,

including their parents, and as a result thereto, petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. i.e. Cr.MMO No. 663/2021, has been filed in this Court for

quashing of FIR is established on record as Cr.MMO No. 663/2021 was listed in this Court on 21.01.2022 i.e. on the same date when the present bail

petition was heard.

The possibility that the complainant being the father of the victim had lodged the complaint out of sheer annoyance at the conduct of the petitioner

and the victim, in the given circumstances of the case, cannot be ruled out, especially when subsequently he has agreed for quashing of the FIR.

Even otherwise, the investigation in the case is complete and the challan has been presented before the Court of competent jurisdiction. Keeping in

view the facts of the case, preÂ​trial incarceration of the petitioner is neither warranted nor required. The allegations against him are yet to be proved.

Petitioner is permanent resident of Village Sungra, Tehsil Nichar, P.S. Nichar (Sungra), District Kinnaur, H.P. and has roots in the society. There

is no likelihood of his absconding from the course of justice. It is not even the case of the respondent that the release of the petitioner on bail may

adversely affect the course of trial, if any. Nothing has been said about the potential, if any, of the petitioner to tamper with the prosecution evidence.

No fruitful purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioner in custody.

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No.

29/2021, dated 03.08.2021, registered at Women Police Station, Solan, H.P., under Sections 363, 366, 376 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code IPC and

Section 4 of POCSO, Act, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/Â with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

learned trial Court. This order shall, however, be subject to the following conditions:Â​

i) Petitioner shall regularly attend the trial of the case before learned Trial Court and shall not cause any delay in its conclusion.

ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner, whatsoever and shall not dissuade any person from speaking the truth in

relation to the facts of the case in hand.

iii) Petitioner shall be liable for immediate arrest in the instant case in the event of petitioner violating the conditions of this bail.

(iv) Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of learned trial Court till completion of trial, if any.

Any expression of opinion hereinÂabove shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and shall be deemed only for the purpose of disposal of

this petition.