IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA .
Cr.M.P(M) No.1577 of 2018 Decided on : 28.11.2018.
Madan Lal …..Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Kishore Pundeer, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Hemant Vaid, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikrant Chandel and Mr. Yudhveer Singh Thakur, Deputy Advocate Generals.
ASI Raghubir Singh, P.S Pachhad, District Sirmaur, H.P, in person.
Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral) The instant petition, stands instituted by the bail applicant, under, Section 438 Cr.P.C, wherein he seeks grant of anticipatory bail qua him, given his apprehending his arrest, for his allegedly committing offences punishable, under Sections 376, and, section 506 of the I.P.C registered in case FIR No. 78 of 2018 of 1.11.2018, with Police Station, Pachhad, District Sirmaur, H.P.
2. The reason for this Court proceeding, to, afford facility of bail, to the bail applicant, is, embedded in the factum of (a) the prosecutrix alleging qua hers being subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by the bail applicant, in, the year 2016, without, hers specifying the date or the month of the aforesaid year, whereat the afore alleged penal misdemeanors stood perpetrated, upon her person (b) the afore lack of enunciation, with, precision in the FIR also concomitantly render her allegations being construable to be both vague, and, nebulous.
3. The delay in lodging of the FIR is immense, and, therefrom an inevitable inference, is gatherable qua the prosecutrix, meting consent to the sexual intercourse, which stood allegedly forcibly perpetrated on her person, by the bail applicant. Even though she metes an explanation, for the afore delay, yet the explanation is comprised in the factum, qua upon hers reporting the matter to the police hence attracting social stigma upon her, yet the afore explanation rather primafacie, appears to be vague, and, acquires an aura of falsity, given hers being a married lady, and, when she could well earlier disclose the matter to the elders of her family, or, to her husband.
4. The Investigating Officer has also intimated this Court that the accused had rendered to him, his fullest cooperation. Consequently, given the bail applicant, hence, rendering the fullest cooperation to the Investigating Officer, and, also with investigations into the alleged offences, being complete, besides when at this stage, no material stands placed by the prosecution, demonstrating, that in the event of bail being granted to the bail applicant, there being every likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution evidence, thereupon the indulgence of bail is granted to the bail applicant, and, the order rendered on .
20.11.2018 is confirmed, on, the following conditions:
1. That he shall join the investigation, as and when required by the Investigating agency;
2. That he shall 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police;
3. That he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
4. That he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Police Station, concerned;
5. That in case of violation of any of the conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be forfeited and he shall be liable to be taken into custody;
6. That he shall apply for bail afresh when the challan is filed before the trial Court.
5. In view of above, petition stands disposed of. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an …5…
expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial .
Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.
Dasti Copy.
28th November, 2018. ( Sureshwar Thakur ),