ANOOP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an accused in FIR No. 156/13, registered against him in Police Station, Palampur, District Kangra under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code with the allegations that on 31.7.2013, he kidnapped the prosecutrix, a minor girl, below 16 years of age from lawful custody of her mother Smt. Kanta Devi, the complainant. The cause behind it was stated to be enmity with the parents of the accused -petitioner as according to the complainant they used to harass her earlier also and threatening to kidnap her daughter. Immediately after lodging of report, police swung into action and the efforts were made to trace out the prosecutrix. On the next date i.e. 1.8.2013, the complainant, however, herself came to the police station along with the prosecutrix. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded. She was taken to Hospital for medical examination. She however, refused to undergo any such examination. Investigation in the case is almost complete. The accused -petitioner also remained associated with police for the purpose of interrogation. Similar application filed by the accused -petitioner in the Court of Sessions has been dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge -I, Kangra at Dharamshala vide order dated 19.8.2013 annexed to this petition. True it is that the offence, the accused -petitioner allegedly committed is heinous one, however, in view of the investigation, conducted at this stage and the evidence collected by the police it is the appropriate Court, which could form an opinion as to whether any such offence is made out from the perusal thereof or not. So far as the application of this nature is concerned at the time of consideration thereof, the detailed examination of the evidence available on record should be avoided as in that event prejudice may cause to the case of either party. The gravity and seriousness of the offence allegedly committed alone are not the factors need to be taken into consideration at the stage of consideration of an application of this nature. The factors such as existence of case against the accused -petitioner, likelihood of his fleeing away or jumping over the bail, his past criminal history and the likelihood of the commission of similar offence while on bail also weigh in the mind of the Court.

(2.) HAVING gone through the record and also taking into consideration the rival submissions, I find the present a fit case where in the event of arrest of the accused petitioner in connection with the case registered against him, he deserves to be released on bail for the reason that he is permanent resident of District Kangra and as such there is no likelihood of his fleeing away from justice or jumping over the bail. There is no past criminal history into his credit. His movement can otherwise be restricted by imposing suitable conditions. I thus accept this application. It is ordered that in the event of the arrest of the accused -petitioner in connection with FIR No. 156/13, registered in Police Station, Palampur, he shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/ - with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra at Dharamshala. He shall further abide by the following conditions: - -