Ravinder Singh alias Ravi Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh

The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 375 of 2016, dated 22.11.2016, under Sections 452 and 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC"), registered at Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P.

As per the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail.

Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, on 22.11.2016, the complainant, who is the husband of the prosecutrix (name withheld), through a written complaint, reported to the police that on 21.11.2016 around 01:30 p.m., when his wife (prosecutrix) and son were in the house, the petitioner forcibly entered the house and committed rape on the prosecutrix. Thereafter, the petitioner fled away from the spot. When the complainant reached his house, the prosecutrix narrated the occurrence to him. On the subsequent morning, the complainant reported the matter to the police. On the complaint of the complainant, police registered an FIR and started investigation. The police got conducted the medically examination of the prosecutrix. The petitioner was arrested on 22.11.2016 and he was also medically examined. The police also completed all the codal formalities. As per the prosecution, in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor to flee from justice. He has prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General, has argued that the petitioner has committed a very serious crime and there are chances that in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and flee from justice. Lastly, he has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail.

At this stage, taking into consideration the age of the petitioner, the age of the prosecutrix, the place where the offence has been committed and presence of the small child at the place of occurrence and also the fact that the petitioner, in case enlarged on bail, is not in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and he is not in a position to flee from justice, this Court finds that the interests of justice would be met in case the petitioner, who is behind the bars since long, is released on bail. This Court also finds that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, therefore, 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 of Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, in connection to FIR No. 375 of 2016, dated 22.11.2016, under Sections 452 and 376 IPC, he shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court 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.