Himachal Pradesh High Court
____________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P. And Another on 21 January, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr.MP(M) No.58 of 2025
Decided on: 21.01.2025
____________________________________________________
Sheela Devi ….. petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another …..respondents
____________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Vacation Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1For the petitioner : Mr. Servedaman Rathore,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma and Mr.
Harinder Rawat Additional
Advocates General with Ms. Swati
Draik, Deputy Advocate General
for respondent No.1.
:
LHC Babita No. 298, Women
Police Station, Nahan, District
Sirmaur H.P. present in person.
____________________________________________________
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge, Vacation Judge (oral)The present bail petition has been filed under Section
482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, in FIR No.34 of
2024, dated 14.12.2024, registered at Women Police Station,
Nahan District Sirmaur H.P., under Sections 363, 366A, 354, 376
and 34 IPC and Sections 06, 17 of Protection of Children From
Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).
2. Status report filed, the same is taken on record. Copy
whereof supplied to learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner.
1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
3. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status
report and the record.
4. The victim/complainant in the case at hand is aged
17 years. On the death of her father, the mother of the victim had
left the victim and her two other siblings to fend for themselves.
The elder brother of the victim one Pankaj lives at Kala Amb. The
elder sister of the victim is married at Kala Amb.
5. After the death of the father of the victim, the victim
was being looked after by the elder sister of the late father of the
victim. The aforesaid lady who was taking care of the victim as
per the complainant was a habitual drinker. As a consequence of
drinking habits about two years ago, the said lady had shunted
the victim out of her house.
6. It is thereafter that the victim had gone to the house
of Sheela Devi/bail petitioner, whom she had all along addressed
as her maternal aunt. After having stayed there for two days, the
bail petitioner/Sheela Devi had called her daughter Preeto Devi.
7. Preeto Devi was accompanied by her husband
Ashok Kumar and her two sons Raj Kumar and Ram Kumar. At
the house of the bail petitioner, the victim, who was a minor was
handed over to Preeto Devi and her family. The bail petitioner had
told the victim that she would henceforth live in the house of
Preeto Devi like her daughter-in-law as Preeto Devi’s son Ram
3
Kumar in an informal ceremony at the bail petitioner’s house had
allegedly got married to the victim.
8. Thereafter, the victim was taken to Preeto Devi’s
house at Sarwana (Barwala) in Haryana. At the residence of
Preeto Devi, as per the victim for about last two years, Ram
Kumar had been indulging in wrongful sexual acts with the victim.
Even Ashok Kumar the husband of Preeto Devi is stated to have
made sexual overtures/advances towards the victim. Feeling
aggrieved of the aforesaid, the bail petitioner had left the house of
Preeto Devi and come back to her maternal aunt’s house. Herein
the paternal aunt had refused to keep the victim as according to
the paternal aunt, the victim had now got married and hence she
was now expected to reside in her marital home.
9. Upon being turned out from the house of the paternal
aunt, she proceeded towards the Panchkula Court. Enroute while
travelling in a bus, the conductor of the bus dropped the victim at
the Mahila Police Station at Narayangarh. The Child Welfare
Committee (CWC) Narayangarh kept the victim for two months at
a Bal Ashram. Upon determining her antecedents, she was
shifted to Nahan. At Nahan, the concerned CWC on 13.12.2024
brought the victim to the concerned Mahila Police Station,
thereupon the present compliant was lodged against all
concerned.
4
10. In the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances,
the present petitioner had approached this Court. Vide order
dated 06.01.2025, interim protection had been granted to the bail
petitioner. As per the status report filed, the bail petitioner is
regularly participating in investigation. No recoveries have to be
instituted from the bail petitioner. There is no requirement of any
custodial interrogation insofar as the present bail petitioner is
concerned.
11. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right.
The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative,
according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.
12. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the
accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The
object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative.
13. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are
grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological
and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is
prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The
burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of
his family.
14. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status
report qua the social circumstances of the petitioner whereby it
can be made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the
5
confidence that the Court may place in him to turn out to take
justice at the hands of the Court.
15 Petitioner is permanent resident of village Sainwala,
Mubarikpur, PO Sainwala and Tehsil Paonta Sahib District
Sirmaur, PO Sainwala and Teshil Paonta Sahib District Sirmaur
H.P. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension
regarding her fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the
trial. In any case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the
purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial.
16. Hence, after going through the material available on
record and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial
discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be
exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed
and interim order dated 06.01.2025 is confirmed. This bail order is
subject, however, to the following conditions:-
(i) that the petitioner will appear before the Court
and the Investigating Officer whenever required ;
(ii) that he 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 any facts to the
Court or the police;
(iii) that he will not tamper with the prosecution
evidence nor he will try to win over the
Prosecution witnesses or terrorise them in any
manner;
6
(iv) that he will not deliberately and intentionally
act in a manner which may tend to delay the
investigation or the trial of the case;
(v) that he will not leave India without prior
permission of the Court; &
(vi) Petitioner shall inform the Station House
Officer of the concerned police station about his
place of residence during bail and trial. Any
change in the same shall also be communicated
within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall
furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone
Number, Email, PAN Card, Bank Account Number,
if any.
17. Needless to say that investigating agency shall be at
liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the
aforesaid conditions is violated by the petitioner.
18. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in
this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits
of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any
observations made therein.
19. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition
stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications,
if any.
(Bipin C. Negi)
Vacation Judge
January 21, 2024
tarun
[ad_1]
Source link