Vivek Kohli vs State of H.P.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.—Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the police report and Investigating Officer, ASI Ramesh Chand has produced the record. Learned counsel representing the petitioner-accused has placed on record the certified copy of the order dated 24.5.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (III) Kangra at Dharamshala in a similar application.

Heard.

The present is a case where FIR No. 85 of 2013 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 403 of Indian Penal Code has been registered against the accused-petitioner and his co-accused, namely, Paramjit Singh and Shashi Kumar.

The allegations against the accused-petitioner, in a nutshell, are that during his posting as Junior Accountant (Kanishth Lekhapal) in the office of Block Development Officer, Pragpur, district Kangra, he has forged the signatures of the Block Development Officer on various cheques and drawn the money from MGNREGA Account. A complaint to this effect against him was made by the Block Development Officer, Pragpur and it is on the basis of the said complaint that a case has been registered against him.

The investigating agency has taken into possession the relevant records from the office of Block Development Officer, Pragpur. A sum of Rs. 58,783 is stated to be embezzled by the accused-petitioner. The audit of the office of Block Development Officer has been conducted and the report is still awaited.

On the other hand, the stand of the accused-petitioner, in a nutshell, is that this case has been registered against him falsely at the behest of the Executive Officer, Pragpur Development Block, who allegedly had been taking interest in him and used to call him to her chambers time and again. When he told her that his marriage has been fixed for 2.6.2013, thereafter she started harassing him by one way or the other. The order, Annexure P-1 terminating his services without holding any inquiry has been pressed into service in this regard.

Having gone through the record available at this stage and also analyzing the submissions made on both sides, this Court feels that it is the audit report which may throw some light qua the involvement of the accused-petitioner in this case. The same is still awaited. This also is not a case where at this stage it can be said that the custodial interrogation of the accused is required. In the given facts and circumstances coupled with the factum of the accused-petitioner being a local resident of district Kangra and there being no complaint that he ever avoided to join the interrogation when called upon to do so or involved himself in any unlawful activities, such as tampering with the prosecution evidence or hampering the investigation of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this petition and direct the Investigating Officer or any other arresting police officer to release him on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with this case, of course on the conditions to be imposed upon him.

Consequently, in the event of arrest of the accused-petitioner in the case registered against him vide FIR No. 85 of 2013 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 403 of Indian Penal Code in Police Station, Dehra, 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 the arresting police officer/investigating officer, subject to the following conditions:

The accused-petitioner shall:

(a) make himself available for interrogation as and when required and shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation in a manner so as to take it to its logical end;

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

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

It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses his 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.

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

Copy dasti.