____________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 21 January, 2025

Himachal Pradesh High Court

____________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 21 January, 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

Cr.MP(M) No. 66 of 2025
Decided on: 21.01.2025
____________________________________________________
Prem Singh ….. petitioner
Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh …..respondent
____________________________________________________
Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Vacation Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1

For the petitioner : Mr. Rahul, Advocate vice Ms. Anu
Tuli Azta, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma and Mr.
Harinder Rawat Additional
Advocates General with Ms. Swati
Draik, Deputy Advocate General
for the respondent/State.

:

ASI Tej Singh P.S. New Shimla,
present in person.

____________________________________________________
Bipin Chander Negi, Vacation Judge (oral)

The present bail petition has been filed under Section

482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, in FIR No.13 of

2024, dated 27.04.2024, registered at Police Station, New

Shimla, H.P. under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the

Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status

report.

3. The bail petitioner is stated to have availed a loan

from H.P. Gramin Bank, Khalini. The bail petitioner had applied

1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2

for the loan on 27th March, 2017. Subsequent thereto after

processing the papers, loan was disbursed forthwith in favour of

the present bail petitioner. The loan was for a sum of Rs.9.5 lacs

approximately. The bail petitioner had defaulted in the repayment

of the loan. For recovery of the same, appropriate proceedings

under the Civil Law had been initiated by the concerned bank.

The present FIR has been lodged on 27.04.2024.

4. The allegations in the same are that for procuring the

loan way back in March, 2017, the bail petitioner had used forged

documents.

5. The dispute in the case at hand primarily appears to

be of a civil nature. No recovery is to be instituted from the

present bail petitioner. Investigating in the case at hand is still in

progress. The case is primarily a record based case. There is no

requirement for any custodial interrogation insofar the bail

petitioner is concerned. Forgery, if any, is to be determined at the

trial.

6. 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.

7. 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.
3

8. 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.

9. 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

confidence, that the Court may place in him to turn out to take

justice at the hands of the Court.

10. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Village

Halai, Post Office Sarion, Tehsil Theog, District Shimla H.P. and

the respondent-State has not expressed any apprehension of the

petitioner fleeing from justice. In any case, the petitioner can be

put to terms for the purpose of safe, secure and un-obstructed

completion of trial.

11. 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 07.01.2025 is confirmed. This bail order is

subject, however, to the following conditions:-
4

(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;

(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.

12. 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.

13. 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 .

14. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of.

(Bipin C. Negi)
Vacation Judge

January 21, 2025
tarun