Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
P.S. RANA, J.
Safi Mohammed son of Babu Khan - Applicant
Versus
State of H.P. - Non-applicant
Cr.MP (M) No. 1264 of 2014
Decided on : 12-12-2014
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, Section 438; Indian Penal Code, Section 307; Arms Act, Sections 25-54-59
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 in connection with a case registered under Section 307 IPC and Sections 25-54-59 of the Arms Act. The applicant claimed innocence and alleged that the complaint was filed out of enmity and ill-will. The police report detailed the incident and the injuries sustained by the victim.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the gravity of the offense, the prima facie evidence, and the need for custodial interrogation were crucial in rejecting the anticipatory bail application. The court also noted the possibility of witness tampering if the applicant was released on bail.
Issues: The issues involved determination of whether the anticipatory bail application should be accepted and the necessity of custodial interrogation in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the nature and seriousness of the offense, character of the evidence, and the possibility of witness tampering were important factors in deciding the anticipatory bail application. The court also emphasized the need for custodial interrogation in cases involving grave offenses.
Final Decision: The anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
JUDGMENT :
P.S. RANA, J.
1. Present bail application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with case FIR No. 125 of 2014 dated 19.9.2014 registered under Section 307 IPC and 25-54-59 of Arms Act in Police Station Nadaun District Hamirpur Himachal Pradesh.
2. It is pleaded that complaint has been filed just to harass and humiliate the applicant and applicant does not own any gun and even family members of applicant also do not own any gun. It is pleaded that applicant is innocent and is not connected with any criminal offence. It is pleaded that in fact applicant is victim of enmity between the complainant and Subhash Chand. It is pleaded that applicant will join the investigation of case and further pleaded that applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will abide by all terms and conditions imposed by Court. Prayer for acceptance of bail application is sought.
3. Per contra police report filed. As per police report case under Section 307 IPC and under Section 25-54-59 of Arms Act is registered against the applicant in P.S. Nadaun vide FIR No. 125 of 2014 dated 19.9.2014. There is recital in police report that Smt. Kamlesh Kumari has two sons and one daughter. There is further recital in police report that daughter of complainant Kamlesh Kumari stood married and her two sons are bachelor. There is further recital in police report that elder son of complainant namely Kamlesh Kumari is posted as Panchayat Secretary at Jolsappad and younger son of complainant namely Kamelsh Kumari is driver by profession. There is further recital in police report that on dated 18.9.2014 at 5 PM Susheel Kumar telephoned complainant Kamlesh Kumari that he would come to the house and he also requested to prepare the meal. There is further recital in police report that at 11 PM again telephone of Susheel Kumar came and complainant inquired about whereabouts of Susheel Kumar, but he could not reply properly. There is further recital in police report that thereafter complainant and her son Manoj Kumar went to a well which was situated nearby the path and thereafter complainant saw that Susheel Kumar was fell upon the path and blood was oozing out from the mouth of Susheel Kumar. There is further recital in police report that thereafter injured Susheel Kumar was brought to Hamirpur for his medical treatment and thereafter injured was referred to Medical College Tanda. There is further recital in police report that thereafter CT scan of complainant was conducted and as per CT scan report injured had sustained injury from the gun upon his mouth. There is also recital in police report that thereafter injured was referred to IGMC and case was registered under Section 307 IPC and under Sections 25-54-59 of Arms Act and matter was investigated. There is also recital in police report that during investigation site plan was prepared and blood clotted earth and sample of blood were took into possession vide seizure memo and statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded. There is recital in police report that injured was operated and injured disclosed the name of accused persons. There is further recital in police report that injured is under treatment in PGI Chandigarh. Prayer for rejection of bail application is sought.
4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State and also perused the record.
5. Following points arise for determination in this bail application:-
1. Whether anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of anticipatory bail application?
2. Final Order.
Findings upon Point No.1
6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of applicant that applicant is innocent and applicant did not commit any criminal offence cannot be decided at this stage. Same fact will be decided when the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
