Vipin Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Kuldip Singh , Judge

This is an application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 179 of 2011 dated 15.10.2011 registered at Police Station, Jawalamukhi, under Sections 379, 411 IPC.

It has been stated that on 15.10.2011 police raided the house of Roshan Lal situated at village Gummer, Tehsil Dehra and recovered 18 filled and 18 empty bags of Government supply cement which were allegedly used for construction of house. Thereafter, the case was registered, Roshan Lal was arrested and released on bail.

The petitioner is President of Gram Panchayat and allegations against him are that he sold the Government supply cement to Roshan Lal. The petitioner filed bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. which has been rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala on 11.01.2012.

The petitioner is innocent, he has committed no offence. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. The prayer has been made for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The bail application has been opposed on the basis of status report. It has been stated in the status report that a secret information was received that Roshan Lal is using in his construction Government supply cement and some bags are still lying with him. On this, a raiding party was constituted and the construction site of Roshan Lal was raided, during raid 18 filled and 18 empty cement bags of Government supply ''Not for Sale'' were recovered from the house of Roshan Lal, who could not produce any papers in support of the bags recovered. On this, case was registered under Sections 379, 411 IPC.

Roshan Lal was arrested on 16.10.2011. Roshan Lal during investigation disclosed that petitioner Vipin Kumar helped him in raising construction with the aid of Government. He also disclosed that he has been given Rs. 18,000/-. He further disclosed that he talked to Vipin Kumar for arranging sand, aggregate, water and cement which were supplied by petitioner through his tractor. Roshan Lal disclosed that the cement which was recovered was also supplied by Vipin Kumar. It has been stated that petitioner had made conflicting statements regarding cement. The prayer has been made for rejection of the bail application.

Heard and perused the police file. The allegations against the petitioner are that he supplied Government supply cement bags to Roshan Lal for construction which were recovered from the house of Roshan Lal. The further allegations are that the empty and filled-in cement bags recovered from the house of Roshan Lal were not meant for sale. On instructions received from the Police Officer, the learned Additional Advocate General has stated that on checking the store of the cement allotted to the petitioner by the Government, no deficiency in the store was found. It has not been pointed out that filled or empty cement bags were of which scheme. It has also not been pointed out that cement allotted to petitioner by the Government for which particular scheme or purpose, but that cement was allegedly sold by petitioner illegally to Roshan Lal.

In any case till now no other material has been collected or pointed out by the Investigating Agency so as to, prima facie, establish the involvement of petitioner with the supply of cement bags to Roshan Lal which were allegedly recovered from Roshan Lal. The Investigating Agency has every right to interrogate the petitioner but simultaneously to refuse bail to the petitioner u/s 438 Cr.P.C., there should be some minimum evidence showing his involvement. The Investigating Agency till now is relying only on the statement of accused Roshan Lal and nothing else. In these circumstances, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail u/s 438 Cr.P.C.

In view of above, the application is allowed and in the event of arrest of petitioner in FIR No. 179 of 2011 dated 15.10.2011 registered at Police Station, Jawalamukhi, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, he be

released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/-with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer with the condition that petitioner shall continue to join the investigation and fully co-operate during investigation and incase the petitioner shall not co-operate in the investigator, then Investigating Agency shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail. The petitioner shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

The observations made in the judgment are for the disposal of the bail application and shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case.