Shri Jawahar Lal vs State of H.P.

Kuldip Singh, Judge

This judgment shall dispose of Cr.M.P.(M) Nos.1135 and 1136 of 2011 which have been filed by petitioners Jawahar Lal and Vikas Chauhan respectively u/s 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing them on bail in FIR No. 345/2011 dated 05.12.2011, registered at Police Station, Rohru, under Sections 341, 323, 354, 506, 382, 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(11) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The petitioners have filed bail applications almost on identical grounds. It has been stated that petitioners were arrested in the above case and they are in judicial custody now. The petitioners are not remotely connected with the commission of offence. The complaint has been lodged by one lady for outraging her modesty as well as extortion and threatening to do away with her life. The lady belongs to Scheduled Caste. The petitioners are not having good relations with the family of the complainant and in order to settle the score with the petitioners, the false complaint has been lodged with the police.

The petitioners are innocent, they have committed no offence. The further custody of the petitioners is not necessary inasmuch as the petitioners are in judicial custody. No purpose will be served for keeping the petitioners in jail for indefinite period. The petitioners are ready to furnish bail bonds. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioners on bail.

The status report has been filed in Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1135 of 2011. It has been stated that case has been registered on the complaint of Krishan Chand. It has been stated that on 05.12.2011 at about 12.30 p.m., Santosh Kumari, wife of the complainant, was returning to her home with her cow. On the way, Ruby and Jawahar Lal met her, who were under the influence of liquor. Ruby demanded ''Charas'' from the wife of the complainant, he also misbehaved with her. On objection raised by the wife of the complainant, Ruby gave kick and fist blows in her abdomen and Jawahar slapped on her ear. The wife of the complainant due to beatings became unconscious and fell down. On hearing hue and cry, the complainant also reached the spot. Chainmati sister-in-law of the complainant tried to intervene, but Ruby slapped her also. The incident was seen by several persons. The wife of the complainant told him that Ruby and Jawahar initially misbehaved/teased her and then called her by caste also. The complainant apprehends threat to his life from the petitioners as the petitioners are of criminal nature. A pendant and tops of the wife of the complainant were also snatched. On this, the case was registered.

It has been stated that both the petitioners were arrested on 15.12.2011. The petitioners have denied that they have snatched any ornament from the wife of the complainant. The recovery of pendant and tops has not been made. The bail applications of the petitioners Vikas Chauhan alias Ruby and Jawahar Lal were dismissed by learned Sessions Judge on 27.12.2011. The report u/s 173 Cr.P.C is ready and is under scrutiny. The petitioners are of criminal nature. In case the petitioners are released on bail, they can terrorize the prosecution witnesses. Vikas Chauhan alias Ruby is an accused in FIR No. 41 dated 27.03.2010 under Sections 341, 323, 34 IPC, FIR No. 136 dated 23.12.2010 under Sections 341, 323, 427, 506, 34 IPC, FIR No. 327 dated 24.10.2011 under Sections 341, 323, 419, 504, 506 IPC and FIR No. 330/2011 dated 30.10.2011 under Sections 452, 323, 419, 380, 506 IPC and Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short ''Act''), all registered at Police Station, Rohru. The prayer has been made for rejection of the bail applications.

Heard and perused the police file. The allegations against both the petitioners are that they misbehaved/teased the wife of the complainant, gave her beatings, as a result of which, she became unconscious. They called her by her caste. The allegations against the petitioners are also that they snatched some gold jewellery which the wife of the complainant was wearing, but no recovery to this effect has been made. It appears as per the prosecution case the trouble started when Vikas Chauhan demanded ''Charas'' then and there from the victim.

It has come on record that petitioner Vikas Chauhan is an accused in several cases as noticed above and one of the cases registered against him is u/s 20 of the Act. The complainant alleged that he apprehends threat to his life and his family at the hands of the petitioners, who are of criminal nature. The petitioner Vikas Chauhan is already an accused in atleast four cases, but petitioner Jawahar Lal has not been shown to be involved previously in any case.

The Investigating Agency has also shown apprehension that keeping in view the criminal nature of the petitioners, they may not be released on bail as there is likelihood of their terrorizing the prosecution witnesses. There is no previous case against petitioner Jawahar Lal. In these circumstances, petitioner Jawahar Lal has made out a case for grant of bail. The petitioner Vikas Chauhan is not entitled to bail at this stage keeping in view that he is already an accused in four cases.

In view of above, Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1136 of 2011 filed by petitioner Vikas Chauhan is dismissed. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1135 of 2011 filed by petitioner Jawahar Lal is allowed. The petitioner Jawahar Lal is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 345/2011 dated 05.12.2011, registered at Police Station, Rohru, under Sections 341, 323, 354, 506, 382, 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(11) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of any Judicial Magistrate at Rohru with the conditions that he shall not terrorize any prosecution witness nor he shall 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 applications and shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case.