MUKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all these petitions arise out of same FIR, they were taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

(2.) By way of instant petitions filed under S.438 CrPC , bail petitioners have prayed for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 19, dated 19.2.2020, under Ss. 451, 324, 427 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station, Theog, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

(3.) Sequel to orders dated 20.2.2020, ASI Brij Lal has come present with the record. Learned Deputy Advocate General states, on the the instructions of Investigating Officer, that the bail petitioners have joined the investigation and nothing remains to be recovered from them. However, learned Deputy Advocate General, while expressing his apprehension that in the event of bail petitioners being enlarged on bail, they may flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution evidence, stated that, in case, this Court intends to enlarge the petitioners on bail, they may be imposed strict conditions.