KAILASH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant regular bail petition arises out of the FIR No.23/21, dtd. 30/11/2021 registered at Women Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra (HP). The petitioner is facing accusations therein under Sec. 376, 384, 201 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) According to the prosecution, FIR in question was registered on the basis of a complaint of the prosecutrix presented to the Deputy Commissioner Kangra, Dharamshala on 30/11/2021. The complainant stated therein that:- Around six- seven months ago, because of her family's pitiable and poor condition, she ventured out from her home for search of a job. She became a labourer in a tea garden at Palampur. She met an old woman there, who had a daughter and a son name Kailash Jamwal (bail petitioner). One day, while at work, something had entered her clothes. To inspect the same, she went inside a room and took out her clothes. She was not aware at that time that the petitioner had clicked her photographs and made a video of her. He started blackmailing her thereafter, using those photos and videos. Under threat of the blackmail, petitioner established physical relations with the prosecutrix many times. The complainant/prosecutrix being a simple lady, unaware of law, acceded to the petitioner's demand under the threats of defamation and blackmail. Though she complained about her sexual exploitation in the hands of the petitioner to his mother and sister, but they in turn accused her and threatened that she would be defamed in village in case she disclosed the incident to anyone. Petitioner under the threat of making public her obscene video also forced her to bring money & jewelery. In this manner, she handed over her gold ring, bangle and necklace to the petitioner. When she wanted to end her life, her brother-in-law came to know about it and inquired the entire matter. He instilled confidence in her, as a result of which, she mustered the courage to lodge the complaint against the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner pleaded that the bail petitioner and the prosecutrix were very well acquainted with each other. They both are married and have children. Both of them were very well aware about each others' marital status. The petitioner and the prosecutrix were in contact with each other out of their own free will and consent. The prosecutrix has lodged the complaint trying to save her face in front of her family members. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a labourer and a local resident. He is not in a position to either influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence. The petitioner also undertakes not to influence or tamper the prosecution evidence, in case of his enlargement on bail. He will abide by all the terms and conditions of the bail and will not threaten or induce the prosecution witnesses including the complainant and her family members.