Subhash Chand vs State of Himachal Pradesh

The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 96 of 2016, dated 14.07.2016, under Sections 376, 506 IPC read with Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012, registered at Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P.

As per the petitioner, he is innocent and he has committed no offence. The petitioner has further prayed that he may be released on bail, as he is behind the bars for the last more than eight months.

Police reports stand filed. As per the prosecution story, on 14.07.2016, mother of the prosecutrix telephonically informed the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? police that her daughter has been raped by the petitioner and appropriate action be taken. Police went to the place of occurrence and statement of the complainant (mother of the prosecutrix) under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded. As per her statement, on 14.07.2016 she had gone for labour work and her daughter (prosecutrix, name deliberately withheld) was all alone in the house. When the complainant reached home at 6:15 p.m. the prosecutrix disclosed to her that she was sexually assaulted by the petitioner and she was also threatened by the petitioner. The complainant disclosed that the age of her daughter is 10? years. On the statement of the complainant, a case under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4 POCSO was registered against the petitioner. Prosecutrix was medically examined and statements of the witnesses were also recorded. Statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was also recorded. All codal formalities were completed. Accused was arrested on 15.07.2016 and since then he is in judicial custody. RFSL report qua the blood sample of the petitioner has been received. As per the medical report of the prosecutrix, possibility of sexual assault is not ruled out. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that as the petitioner has committed a heinous crime and his bail application may be dismissed.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that taking into consideration the medical report, statement of the prosecutrix and other material, which has come on record, it is clear that no case under Section 376 IPC is made out against the petitioner. He has also argued that as the petitioner is behind the bars since last eight months and he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor to flee, he may be released on bail. On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has been found involved in a heinous offence under Section 376 IPC read with Section 4 of POCSO Act and there is no ground to release him on bail. He has prayed that the petition may be dismissed.

In order to appreciate the rival contention of the parties, I have gone through the material, which has come on record, and the police report in detail.

At this stage, this Court has taken into consideration the police record, police report and other documents, which have come on record, and the fact that the petitioner is resident of the place and is behind the bars for the last more than eight months. From the record it is clear that the petitioner, being resident of the place, is not in a position to flee from justice and is also not in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence, thus, the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for unlimited period, as he is in judicial custody for the last eight months. Moreover, no fruitful purpose can be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for unlimited period. Keeping in view all the above mentioned circumstances and also applying mind to the facts of the case, which have come on record, this Court finds that present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Therefore, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, in case FIR No. 96 of 2016, dated 14.07.2016, under Sections 376, 506 IPC read with Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012, registered at Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will join investigation of the case 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.