High CourtsSingle Bench

Prem Singh Thakur vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 20 March 2023 · Citation: (2023) 03 SHI CK 0051

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Sharma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420, 467, 468, 471
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (Main) No. 633 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

16 paragraphs · 801 words

Sandeep Sharma, J

1.

Pursuant to order dated 15.3.2023, whereby bail petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on bail, in the event of arrest in FIR No. 33, dated 4.3.2023 under Ss. 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC registered at Police Station Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, respondent-State has filed status report. Investigating officer has come present with record. Record perused and returned.

2.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while fairly admitting the factum of joining of investigation by the bail petitioner, states that in case this Court intends to enlarge the bail petitioner on bail, stringent conditions may be imposed upon him.

3.

Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in a catena of cases have repeatedly held that one is deemed to be innocent, till the time, he/she is proved guilty in accordance with law. Apprehension expressed by learned Assistant Advocate General, that in the event of being enlarged on bail, bail petitioner may flee from justice or indulge in such offences again, can be best met by putting the bail petitioner to stringent conditions.

4.

Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 227/2018, Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr decided on 6.2.2018 has held that freedom of an individual can not be curtailed for indefinite period, especially when his/her guilt is yet to be proved. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty.

5.

Hon’ble Apex Court in Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation (2012)1 Supreme Court Cases 49 has held that gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by the court while exercising its discretion. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative.

6.

In Manoranjana Sinh alias Gupta versus CBI, (2017) 5 SCC 218, Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused in the trial and the proper test to be applied in the solution of the question whether bail should be granted or refused is whether it is probable that the party will appear to take his trial. Otherwise also, normal rule is of bail and not jail. Apart from above, Court has to keep in mind nature of accusations, nature of evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment, which conviction will entail, character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused involved in that crime.

7.

The Apex Court in Prasanta Kumar Sarkar versus Ashis Chatterjee and another (2010) 14 SCC 496, has laid down various principles to be kept in mind, while deciding petition for bail viz. prima facie case, nature and gravity of accusation, punishment involved, apprehension of repetition of offence and witnesses being influenced.

8.

In view of above, bail petitioner has carved out a case for himself, as such, present petition is allowed. Order dated 15.3.2023 is made absolute, subject to bail petitioner’s furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000- with one local surety in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, besides the following conditions:

(a) He shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly 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;

(b) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;

(c) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and

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

9.

It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses the liberty or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him, the investigating agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail.

10.

Any observations made hereinabove shall not be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case and shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition alone. The petition stands accordingly disposed of.

A downloaded copy of this order shall be accepted by the learned trial Court, while accepting the bail bonds from the petitioner and in case, said court intends to ascertain the veracity of the downloaded copy of order presented to it, same may be ascertained from the official website of this Court.