ANITA PANWAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners Nos. 1 to 5, some of whom are minors, are the sons and daughters and petitioner No.6 is the wife of one Asa Ram, who is a resident of village Chakla,Tehsil Arki, District Solan.

(2.) One Nirmala lodged a First Information Report on August 26. 1984, at the Police Station Sadar Shimla, alleging the commission of an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code at the Shimla Bus Stand on August 24, 1984, in which a girl was stated to have been involved. Apprehending arrest in connection with the said case, an application for anticipatory bail was moved on behalf of the first petitioner, Anita, before the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, on August 26, 1984. The learned Sessions Judge, Shimla assigned the said application for hearing to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla and, meanwhile, issued interim directions that Anita should not be arrested till the application was heard and finally decided. The learned Additional Sessions Judge granted the anticipatory bail on August 28, 1984, with a direction that Anita, should co-operate in the investigation of the offence As. And when called upon by the Investigating Officer. On August 30, 1984 an application was moved for and on behalf of Anita before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla, seeking directions that the Investigating Officer should permit her lawyer to remain present at the time of investigation in case her presence was required at the police station for the purposes of interrogation. The application was heard on August 31, 1984. It appears that at that time a statement was made by or on behalf of the Investigating Officer that the presence of Anita was not required for the time being for the purposes of investigation and that, therefore, no effective orders were made on the said application in view of the said statement.

(3.) On September 19, 1984, Asa Ram, his son Devinder (Petitioner No.4), who is admittedly a minor, his daughters Anita and Uma (Petitioner Nos. 1 and 5 respectively) and his wife Kalawati (Petitioner No, 6) were summoned to the Police Station Sadar, Shimla for, interrogation by, the Investigating Officer (second respondent) but none of them reported to the police station. Again on November 29, 1984, Asa Ram, Uma, Anita and Kalawati were summoned to the Police Station Sadar, Shimla, for interrogation by A.S.I. Kuldip. Chand but on the said occasion also they failed to report as directed.