Shankar Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Petitioner has approached this Court, invoking provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), seeking bail in case FIR No.112/2021, dated 27.9.2021, registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC), in Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

Status Report stands filed. Record was also produced, which was returned after perusal with direction to the learned Additional Advocate General to retain photocopy of the relevant record.

Prosecution case is that complainant approached the police in Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, and lodged a report that she was married about 10 years ago to one Aman and was living at Damtal and couple was blessed with two daughters. It was further reported that after death of her husband about five years ago, she alongwith her daughters (aged 8 years and 4 years) had started living in a rented accommodation at Pathankot where petitioner Shankar Singh used to come to her quarter frequently who offered his accommodation to her on rent at the rate of `2,000/- per month, whereupon she shifted to Damtal in the quarter of petitioner. According to her, two months ago, at about 9.30 p.m. to 10 p.m., petitioner came to her quarter and asked a glass for taking liquor and the moment she gave glass to the petitioner, he caught her by the arm and threw her on the bed, whereupon she cried and her daughter, who was in another room came, but petitioner had bolted the wire-mesh door from inside and had violated her and thereafter had threatened her that in case of disclosure of the incident, he would kill her and her daughters and, thus, due to fear she did not disclose anything to anyone nor approached the police.

On the basis of aforesaid report, FIR under Sections 376 & 506 IPC has been registered against the petitioner.

As per Status Report, statement of complainant was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before Magistrate, wherein she reiterated her statement made to the police with further statement that earlier, because of fear, she did not disclose the incident to anyone, but now the petitioner had been teasing and quarreling with her again and again and, therefore, she reported the matter to the police.

Statement of child witness (daughter of complainant) has also been recorded, wherein she has stated that about two-three months ago 'Deepu wala uncle' (petitioner) had come and her mother was crying in the room and, at that time, she was playing with mobile in the adjoining room and on hearing the cries of her mother, she had tried to open the door, which was closed from inside, and the door was opened after half an hour and the petitioner had left the place with threat to kill them alongwith their mother in case of disclosure of the incident to anyone.

Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the petitioner is involved in commission of a heinous crime, therefore, he is not entitled for release on bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is unexplained inordinate delay of two months in lodging the report and that issue in dispute between complainant and petitioner is something else and even if prosecution case is taken to be true as it is then also it is apparent from the statement of the complainant that the relation between the petitioner and the complainant was consensual, as she has stated that petitioner used to come to her quarter at Pathankot also and on his request she had shifted to the quarter of petitioner and that even after the incident she continued to live in the same quarter and further that incident has been reported by the petitioner to the police probably for disclosure of the same by her daughter to her relations.

Considering entire material on record, but without assessing it on merit, and taking note of principles and factors relevant to be considered at the time of deciding bail application with reference to aforesaid facts and circumstances placed before me, and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General, I find that at this stage, petitioner is entitled for bail.

Accordingly, present application is allowed and petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in case FIR No.112/2021, dated 27.9.2021, registered in Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court, upon such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court, including the conditions enumerated hereinafter, so as to ensure the presence of petitioner/ accused at the time of trial and also subject to following conditions:-

(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available to the police or any other Investigating Agency or Court in the present case as and when required;

(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 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 his liberty in any manner;

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

(vii) that in case petitioner indulges in repetition of similar offence(s) then, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution;

(viii) that the petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission;

(ix) that the petitioner shall inform the Police/Court his contact number and shall keep on informing about change in address and contact number, if any, in future.

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 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 condition 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.

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.

Petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. Petitioner is permitted to produce a copy of this order, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, may verify it from Website of the High Court.