Deep Kumar vs State Of H.P.

Anoop Chitkara, J

The petitioner, who is in judicial custody for burning a cow-shed alongwith two cows, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), seeking regular bail.

In Para 6 of the bail application, the petitioner declares having no criminal history.

Briefly, the allegations against the petitioner are that on 6.1.2021, under the influence of liquor, the petitioner sat on fire the cow-shed of the

complainant alongwith two cows. In that fire, cow-sheds of other villagers were also burnt, which led to the registration of the FIR, mentioned above.

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that incarceration before the proof of guilt would cause grave injustice to the petitioner and his family.

Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Ld. Deputy Advocate General has placed on record the status report and the same is taken on record. He contends that if

this Court is inclined to grant bail, then such a bail be subject to stringent conditions.

Before regular bail is considered, the conduct of the petitioner would be a relevant factor. As such, this Court is inclined to grant interim bail to the

petitioner till 1.2.2021.

In Manish Lal Shrivastava v State of Himachal Pradesh, CrMPM No. 1734 of 2020, after analysing judicial precedents, this Court observed that

any Court granting bail with sureties should give a choice to the accused to either furnish surety bonds or give a fixed deposit, with a further option to

switch over to another.

The petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR mentioned above, subject to his furnishing a personal bond for Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR

25,000/-) with two sureties of a similar amount, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate having the jurisdiction over the Police Station conducting

the investigation, and in case of non-availability, any Ilaqa Magistrate. Before accepting the sureties, the concerned Magistrate must satisfy that in

case the accused fails to appear in Court, then such sureties are capable to produce the accused before the Court, keeping in mind the Jurisprudence

behind the sureties, which is to secure the presence of the accused.

In the alternative, the petitioner may furnish aforesaid personal bond and fixed deposit(s) for Rs. Twenty-five thousand only (INR 25,000/-), made

in favour of ""Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Mandi, H.P.,

a) Such Fixed deposits may be made from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 50%, or any of the stable private banks, e.g.,

HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, etc., with the clause of automatic renewal of principal, and liberty of the interest reverting to the

linked account.

b) Such a fixed deposit need not necessarily be made from the account of the petitioner and need not be a single fixed deposit.

c) If such a fixed deposit is made in physical form, i.e., on paper, then the original receipt shall be handed over to the concerned Court.

d) If made online, then its printout, attested by any Advocate, and if possible, countersigned by the accused, shall be filed, and the depositor shall get

the online liquidation disabled.

e) The petitioner or his Advocate shall inform at the earliest to the concerned branch of the bank, that it has been tendered as surety. Such information

be sent either by e-mail or by post/courier, about the fixed deposit, whether made on paper or in any other mode, along with its number as well as FIR

number.

f) After that, the petitioner shall hand over such proof along with endorsement to the concerned Court.

g) It shall be total discretion of the petitioner to choose between surety bonds and fixed deposits. It shall also be open for the petitioner to apply for

substitution of fixed deposit with surety bonds and vice-versa.

h) Subject to the proceedings under S. 446 CrPC, if any, the entire amount of fixed deposit along with interest credited, if any, shall be

endorsed/returned to the depositor(s). Such Court shall have a lien over the deposits up to the expiry of the period mentioned under S. 437-A CrPC,

1973, or until discharged by substitution as the case may be.

The attesting officer shall, on the reverse page of personal bonds, mention the permanent address of the petitioner along with the phone number(s),

WhatsApp number (if any), e-mail (if any), and details of personal bank account(s) (if available).

The petitioner shall not influence, browbeat, pressurize, make any inducement, threat, or promise, directly or indirectly, to the witnesses, the Police

officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts of the case, to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police, or the Court, or to

tamper with the evidence.

Any Advocate for the petitioner and the Officer in whose presence the petitioner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all conditions of

this bail order, in vernacular and if not feasible, in Hindi.

There would no need for a certified copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order from the

official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. In case the attesting officer or the Court wants to verify the authenticity, such an officer

can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

List on 1.2.2021. State to file fresh status report.