The completion of investigation, filing of police report, and prolonged custody can be considered as factors for granting bail, subject to stringent conditions to prevent the accused from interfering with the legal process.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. - The petitioner, who is in custody, has come up before this Court seeking regular bail on the grounds that investigation is complete, the police report under section 173 (2) CrPC stands filed, and the accused is in custody for long time.

2. Earlier, the petitioner had filed the following bail petitions under Section 439 CrPC:

a) Bail application No.253 of 2020, filed before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, was dismissed by the said Court vide order dated 10.12.2020.

3. The petitioner has following criminal history:-

(i) FIR No.305 dated 2.12.2020, registered under Sections 342, 323, 364A, 388, 504, 506 and 120B of IPC, in Police Station Bhuntar, District Kullu.

4. Briefly, the allegations against the petitioner, which led to registration of an FIR, mentioned above, are that on 21.11.2020, wife of the victim visited police station Bhuntar and gave a written complaint to SHO. She informed that on 20.11.2020, her husband had visited Kullu and on 21.11.2020, at about 11-12 a.m., he had called her that his vehicle has met with an accident and he needs a sum of Rs.2 lacs to compromise the matter. After sometime, she received another phone call and he then informed her that Surinder Kumar and his wife Krishna had kidnapped him and they are demanding a sum of Rs.3 lacs. Based on this information, police registered the aforementioned FIR. The investigation revealed involvement of other persons and they are also arraigned as accused. Further, another FIR No.305 of 2020, under Sections 342, 323, 364A, 388, 504, 506 and 120B of IPC was also registered against the accused persons.

5. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that incarceration before the proof of guilt would cause grave injustice to the petitioner and family.

6. On the contrary, the contention on behalf of the State is that the accused is a proven habitual offender, and given his past conduct; he is likely to repeat the offence. He further insists that if this Court is inclined to grant bail, then such a bond must be subject to very stringent conditions.

7. The possibility of the accused influencing the investigation, tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing justice, can be taken care of by imposing elaborative and stringent conditions. In Sushila Aggarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, the Constitutional Bench held that unusually, subject to the evidence produced, the Courts can impose restrictive conditions.

REASONING:

8. Under no circumstances, the conduct of the petitioner is condonable or forgivable if proven to be true. However, a limited question before this Court is to grant or bail or not. These observations nowhere suggest his innocence or lesser role. The difficulty is that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, trial Courts are already clocked with many trials, due to which even the petitioner is also incarcerating for a long time. The period of incarceration already undergone would also be an additional factor for the grant of bail. Therefore, the cumulative effect of all the elements would certainly make out a case for bail at this stage. Thus, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case and without commenting on the merits, the present bail application is allowed.

9. Given the above reasoning, the Court is granting bail to the petitioner, subject to strict terms and conditions, which shall be over and above and irrespective of the contents of the form of bail bonds in chapter XXXIII of CrPC, 1973.

10. In Manish Lal Shrivastava v State of Himachal Pradesh, CrMPM No. 1734 of 2020, after analysing judicial precedents, this Court observed that any Court granting bail with sureties should give a choice to the accused to either furnish surety bonds or give a fixed deposit, with a further option to switch over to another.

11. The petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR mentioned above, subject to his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/), and shall furnish