Devender Singh v. State Of Himachal Pradesh .

The present bail applications have been moved by the petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 146 of 2018, dated 21.08.2018, under Section 376 IPC, registered in Police Station Baijnath, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

2. As per the averments made in the petitions, the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. rt o case. They are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. They are ready and willing to join the investigation, so they be released on bail.

3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 21.08.2018, the prosecutrix (name withheld) made a written complaint to the police wherein it is averred that her brother-in-law (Nandoi) and his friend, Devender Singh (petitioners herein) made a video clip of the prosecutrix. On 12.05.2017, petitioner Devender Singh called the prosecutrix and when the prosecutrix went to meet him, he had sexual intercourse with her and also prepared her video. Petitioner Devender Singh sent her photos and video to petitioner Vinod Kumar. Subsequently, petitioner Vinod Kumar sent her video and photos to the husband of the prosecutrix and he started threatening him that he will upload the video and photos on social media. On the anvil of the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, a case was registered and the investigation ensued. The prosecutrix did not agree to get herself medically examined. Police did not find any obscenity in the screen shot wherein the prosecutrix and petitioner Devender Singh were simply sitting together and this screen shot was allegedly sent by petitioner Vinod Kumar to the husband of the prosecutrix. Police prepared the spot map of the hotel room, where the prosecutrix was allegedly raped by petitioner Devender Singh. However, no record qua the stay of the prosecutrix and petitioner Devender Singh was found in the records of the hotel. As per the prosecution, on 19.04.2018 the rt o prosecutrix gave a complaint against the petitioners, wherein no allegations qua sexual assault was made and the allegations were qua cheating only. Subsequently, the matter was amicably settled through Panchayat. Statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section

164 Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation petitioner Devender Singh disclosed that as he wanted to purchase land in Shimla, the prosecutrix told him that she would get the land for him and in that context he used to talk with her. The police have sent the mobile phones of the petitioners and the mobile of the husband of the prosecutrix to RFSL, Dharamshala, for examination. Report from RFSL, Dharamshala, is yet awaited. The husband of the prosecutrix could not produce any obscene video or photo of the prosecutrix. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the bail applications be dismissed.

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

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation and their custodial interrogation is not at all required. He has further argued that by keeping the petitioners behind the bars no fruitful purpose will be served. The petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so they may be released on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate rt o General has argued that in case the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. The petitioners have committed a serious offence, thus it is prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners be dismissed.

6. At this moment, considering the facts that the petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have taken place, delay in lodging the FIR and overall aspects of the case, which have come on record and also the fact that the petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation and co-operate in it, they are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence, nor in a position to flee from justice, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, is required to be exercised in their favour. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that the petitioners be released on bail, in the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 146 of 2018, dated 21.08.2018, under Section 376 IPC, registered in Police Station Baijnath, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, on their furnishing personal bond to the tune of `25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:

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

(ii) That the petitioners will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. rt o

(iii) That the petitioners 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.

7. In view of the above, the petitions stand disposed of. Copy dasti. (Chander Bhusan Barowalia) 3rd October, 2018 Judge (virender)