IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that bail should be granted when no prima facie or reasonable grounds exist, and the nature of the crime is a crucial factor in considering bail applications.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Bail Petitioner, namely Jaswinder Singh, has come up before this Court seeking pre-arrest bail, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’] originating from FIR No.47, dated 23.12.2023, under Sections 354, 354-A, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code [hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’] registered at Women Police Station Una, District Una [H.P.]

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The case set up by Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the complainant [X] had asked for financial assistance which was extended by the bail petitioner as per details in Para-3 of Annexure P-1. Since the amounts so given to the complainant [X] were not repaid, therefore, the bail petitioner got issued a legal notice on 01.09.2023 [Annexure P-1] but in vain. The bail petitioner is stated to have filed a suit for recovery of Rs.1,26,500/- [Annexure P-2] with Civil Judge (Senior Division), Una, which is pending as on day. The bail petitioner is stated to have made a request to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Rup Nagar, on 27/28.10.2023 [Annexure P-3], requesting the concerned Police Authorities to take action against the complainant [X]. Since no action was taken, the bail petitioner was constrained to approach the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CRM-M-56752-2023 (O&M) and the same was decided on 09.11.2023 [Annexure P-5], whereby, the Court concerned directed the Superintendent of Police, Rup Nagar, to decide the representation in accordance with law. It is further averred that on 25.12.2023, the bail petitioner made a request to the Superintendent of Police, Una, not to take action on any complaint submitted by the complainant against the bail petitioner, as the same is an outcome of the revenge and ulterior motives, just to escape the repayment of financial assistance so availed by the complainant.

3. The bail petitioner is stated to have filed a bail application No.27 of 2024 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, and the same was dismissed on 23.01.2024 [Annexure P-8] for want of presence, of the accused, at the time of hearing of the bail application.

4. In the background of the facts, referred to above, the learned counsel for the bail petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated at the behest of fictitious and wrong allegations levelled by the complainant [X] against him. It is further stated in the application that the present FIR is a result of revenge at the behest of the complainant, who still has not repaid the financial assistance availed by her. The bail petitioner has given an undertaking that the bail petitioner shall join investigation and shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court and shall not tamper with the evidence and cause any threat to the witnesses in any manner.

After the registration of FIR, the bail petitioner, namely [Jaswinder Singh], moved an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, District Una [H.P.] in bail application No.27/2024 but the same was dismissed by the Learned Trial Court on account of non-appearance of the petitioner-accused [Jaswinder Singh] before the said Court. In this background, this is how the bail petitioner has approached this Court, for anticipatory bail.

In the instant proceedings, the matter was listed before this Court on 14.02.2024 when this Court issued notice and directed the State Authorities to file the reply/status report. However, in the interim, in view of the averments made in the bail application before this Court, the interim bail was granted in favour of the present petitioner.

The matter was then, listed on 05.03.2024 when status report was filed. The matter was then listed on 19.03.2024 when, the fresh status report dated 18.03.2024 was again filed before this Court [Taken on Record]. The status report dated 05.03.20245 and the status report dated 18.03.2024 are pari materia in natur