KAMAL DEV Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has sought regular bail in case FIR No. 17/2015, registered at Police Station, Sadar, District Bilaspur, on 11.01.2015, under Sections 365, 342, 323, 506, 34 IPC.

(2.) THE respondent has produced the records of the investigation and has also filed the status report. From the records of the investigation, it appears that on 11.01.2015 at about 8.30 p.m., the complainant was going to his house alongwith his friend when they happened to meet the bail petitioner alongwith other co -accused. The bail petitioner was in a white coloured Tata Nano Car and said that he would drop the complainant at his house, however, the accused took him to Sungal where the bail petitioner and other co -accused tried to hit him with a rod and he was not only repeatedly slapped but his clothes were also removed. Another co -accused Anil Kumar took away the mobile phone of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant was brought back to the Industrial Area, Bilaspur, where he was forcibly asked to take smack. In the morning, the complainant claims to have been threatened by co -accused Anil Kumar not to disclose this incident to anyone or else they would kill him. It is the further case of the complainant that because the bail petitioner apprehended the complainant to be an informant of the police that is why this treatment was meted out to him.

(3.) IT is vehemently contended by learned Additional Advocate General that though the bail petitioner does not have any previous criminal history, but the other co -accused accompanying him were history -sheeters inasmuch as 8 to 27 cases are pending against them and, therefore, in such circumstances, no leniency can be shown towards the petitioner.