1
( 2024:HHC:12851 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No.2407 of 2024 a/w
connected matters
Date of Decision : 30.11.2024
Cr. MP(M) No.2407 of 2024
Pushpa Devi …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.2408 of 2024
Nirmala …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.2409 of 2024
Chinto Devi …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.2410 of 2024
Salochna …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.2411 of 2024
Reenu Devi …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
2
( 2024:HHC:12851 )
Cr. MP(M) No.2412 of 2024
Swarno Devi …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.2413 of 2024
Anita …… Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Bunesh Pal, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General.
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral)
ASI Anil Kumar, Police Station, Majra, District Sirmour,
Himachal Pradesh, is present along with record. Status report stands filed.
The same is taken on record. Copy, whereof, has been supplied to learned
counsel for the petitioners.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the status
report.
3. All these bails petitions arise out of the same FIR, therefore,
they are taken up together for consideration.
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
3
( 2024:HHC:12851 )
4. Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that the
complainant, in the case at hand, one Ritu Devi who belongs to the
scheduled caste category, lodged a complaint with the Police Station on
12.10.2024 alleging therein that in the morning of 12.10.2024 at about 7:40
a.m., when she had gone to the local temple at Khera, she had been stopped
on the stairs of the temple by the bail petitioners. Post stopping, she had
been pushed and thrown out of the temple on account of the fact that she
belong to the scheduled caste category.
5. On the basis of the above complaint, FIR was got registered.
Interim bail had been granted to the petitioners on 28.10.2024. In pursuance
whereof, bail petitioners have been participating and cooperating in the
investigation.
6. During investigation, except bald statement of the complainant,
i.e., Smt. Ritu Devi, there is no other independent witness who has
corroborated the alleged incident dated 12.10.2024 which had occurred at
about 7:40 a.m., when the informant/complainant had visited the temple at
Khera from where she had been pushed and thrown out. Since there exist
no CCTV camera in the temple, therefore, there is no electronic evidence
also, in the case at hand.
7. Other than the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that inter se the parties there exist several disputes qua ownership
and possession of the lands which are contiguous. There are also other
criminal disputes pending inter se the parties. In the aforesaid
4
( 2024:HHC:12851 )
circumstances, foisting of a false case by the informant upon the bail
petitioners cannot be ruled out at this stage.
8. Personal liberty of an individual needs to be protected and
an individual is presumed to be innocent till found guilty. Subjecting an
individual to custody prior to trial in the present circumstances is not
justified. As far as, the allegations made against the petitioners in the
case at hand are concerned, they would face trial. In the case at hand,
insofar as the petitioners are concerned, there is no possibility of flight risk
involved and neither do they have criminal antecedents.
9. Accordingly, present petition is allowed and petitioners are
directed to be enlarged on bail and interim bail granted on 28.10.2024 is
confirmed. The bail is granted subject to the conditions enumerated
hereinafter, so as to ensure the presence of petitioners/accused at the
time of trial:
(a) They shall make themselves available for the purpose of
interrogation, if so required and regularly attend the trial
Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented
by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance
by filing appropriate application;
(b) They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor
hamper the investigation of the case in any manner
whatsoever;
(c) They shall not make any inducement, threat or promises
to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the
Court or the Police Officer; and
(d) They shall not leave the territory of India without the prior
permission of the Court.
5
( 2024:HHC:12851 )
10. It is clarified that if the petitioners misuse the liberty or
violates any of the conditions imposed upon them, the Investigating
Agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail.
11. Any observations made herein above shall not be construed
to be a reflection on the merits of the case and shall remain confined to
the disposal of this petition alone. The petition stands accordingly
disposed of.
( Bipin Chander Negi)
November 30, 2024 ( Judge
)
KS