Prem Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J

The present bail application has been moved by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on bail, in the

event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 20 of 2019, dated 20.03.2019, under Sections 363, 366A, 120B, 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, registered

in Police Station Tissa, District Chamba, H.P.

As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner 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 story, on 20.03.2019 the mother of the prosecutrix (name withheld) lodged a complaint with the

police alleging that on 19.03.2019, at about 06:00 p.m., her daughter (prosecutrix) went missing from home. The complaint saw a vehicle from the

lintel, which was going in a very high speed. The complaint raised a suspicion that someone took the prosecutrix on the pretext of marrying her. Upon

the complaint, police registered a case and the investigation ensued. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix was found with accused Trilok

Singh of village Lilyana, but he managed to escape in the jungle. The prosecutrix was handed over to her parents. The prosecutrix divulged that in a

jaatar (a religious function) she came in touch with accused Trilok and thereafter they used to talk on phone. She further divulged that on 19.03.2019,

at about 07:30 p.m., accused Trilok Singh called her and asked to come on the road. Accused was accompanied by his brother Prem (petitioner

herein) Sobhia Ram and driver and they took her in the vehicle. When they reached near Nakrodh, one Bittu, who is resident of her village, stopped

his vehicle ahead of their vehicle, so accused Trilok and Prem quarreled with him and the driver of their vehicle left them. The accused persons and

the petitioner took the prosecutrix to the house accused Sobhia Ram. Thereafter, on the subsequent day accused Trilok and Prem (petitioner herein)

took the prosecutrix to village Lilyana, where accused Trilok sexually molested her twice. On 21.03.2019 accused persons and the petitioner came to

know that police are coming, so accused Trilok took the prosecutrix to jungle and during the night he again sexually molested her twice in his home.

On 22.03.2019 and 23.03.2019 accused Trilok took her to his uncle’s house and on 24.03.2019 accused again took her to jungle and the police

nabbed them. The statement of the prosecutrix was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Police prepared the spot map and got the prosecutrix

medically examined. Record qua date of birth of the prosecutrix was also procured. Police recorded the statements of the witnesses and accused

Trilok was arrested on 02.04.2019. Report qua scientific evidence was also received from RFSL, Dharamshala. As per the police, the petitioner

assisted the main accused in the commission of the crime. On 18.05.2019 challan stands presented in the Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail

application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious offence and in case he is released on bail, he may tamper with the

prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the

reports of the police, carefully.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution

evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as he is resident of the place, so he may be released on bail. He has further argued that the petitioner is

joining and co-operating in the investigation. Conversely, learned Additional Advocate General, has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a

serious offence and in case at this stage he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has

further argued that at this stage the petitioner may not be released on bail and his application be dismissed.

At this stage, considering the role of the petitioner in the alleged offence, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, the

fact that the petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation and he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a

position to flee from justice, as he is resident of the place and also considering the overall material, which has come on record, and without discussing

the same at this stage, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, in the event of his

arrest, is required to be exercised in his favour. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his

arrest, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 20 of 2019, dated 20.03.2019, under Sections 363, 366A, 120B, 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO

Act, registered in Police Station Tissa, District Chamba, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond to the tune of `25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand

only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:

(i) That the petitioner will join investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law.

(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.