CRMPM/11860/2013 of TILAK RAM Vs STATE OF HP on 30 December 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No. 11860 of 2013

Date of Decision : 30.12.2013

Tikkam Ram …Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P.

…Respondent

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?[1 ]

For the petitioner :Mr. R.K Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. R. S. Verma, Addl. Advocate General.

Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral)

ASI Jhabe Ram, I.O., Police Station, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. is present alongwith record. Record perused and returned. Status report filed and taken on record.

2. F.I.R. No. 179/13 was registered at Police Station, Karsog, Distt. Mandi, H.P., on 11.12.2013 under the provisions of Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. Apprehending arrest, petitioner approached this Court, seeking bail under the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 13.12.2013 this Court passed an interim order, directing that in the event of arrest, petitioner shall be Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

enlarged on bail, subject to his complying with the conditions imposed therein. The said interim order is in operation till date.

3. It is seen that amount in question stands accounted for. Also the empty Gas Cylinders stand recovered. Petitioner pleads innocence and states that he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

4. Keeping in view the entire attending circumstances, including the fact that amount stands accounted for and no recovery is to be effected from the accused, as also there is no apprehension that petitioner would tamper with the record or threaten the witnesses or interfere with the investigation, application is allowed.

5. This Court has taken into account the nature of accusation, the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the material so far collected by the prosecution during investigation. I am of the considered view that there is no apprehension made out by the State that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he would tamper with the witnesses or extend any threats to the complainant. There is no probability of the accused abusing his liberty nor would he interfere or in any manner impede with the course of justice. Accused is also not likely to flee from justice. He, through his learned counsel, undertakes to make himself available during the course of investigation, if required, as also during trial, if any.

6. Having taken into consideration the overall attending circumstances, the accused has been able to show that there is reason to believe that the threat of arrest is imminent.

7. For all the aforesaid reasons, the interim order dated 13.12.2013 is made absolute. The petitioner shall be on bail till such time challan is presented in the Court for trial where after he shall approach the Court for regular bail, in accordance with law. Needless to add, during this period petitioner shall fully comply with all the statutory conditions laid down under the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. As a matter of abundant caution, it is clarified that petitioner shall neither tamper with the evidence nor try to influence the witnesses. He shall make himself available for investigation as and when required by the investigating officer. He shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court.

8. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.

With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

Copy dasti.

December 30,2013

(priti)

(Sanjay Karol), Judge.