SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(HP) 14937

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
RAJINDER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HP – Respondent
CRMPM/2171/2023



Petitioner Advocates:Anirudh Sharma Pavinder ,Respondent Advocate: AG AG

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MPM No.2171 of 2023 Reserved on: 01.11.2023 Date of Decision: 09.11.2023 Rajinder Singh @ Anil Kumar ... Petitioner Versus State of H.P ....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr. R.P. Singh, Deputy Advocate Gteneral.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The opetitioner has filed the present petition for seeking thCe regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of House No. 69, Green Enclave, Nakodar Road, Phagwara, District Kapurthala (Punjab). The police of Police Station Sadar, District Solan, registered a case against the petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 328, 342, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC vide FIR No.178 of 2022 dated 14.09.2022. The prosecution version shows that the Police went to Hotel Himani and found three women and five men unconscious. The Police of Sadar Bazaar, Meerut informed the police of Solan on 20.12.2022 that the petitioner had disclosed during interrogation about the commission of

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

offence. The petitioner is innocent and no recovery was effected from him. He is a permanent resident of District Kapurthala and there is no chance of his absconding. The investigation is complete and the final report has been submitted before the Court. Another FIR No. 208 of 2022 was registered in Police Station, Sadar, Meerut (U.P) against the petitioner. The petitioner applied for bail before learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Solan, which was dismissed on 28.07.2023. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposed by the Court. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the bail be granted to the petitioner.

2. h The notice of the petition was issued to the State and the Police filed the status report stating that telephonic information was received on 14.09.2022 that three women and five men were found unconscious in different rooms of Hotel Himani. The Police recorded the statement of Ramesh Kumar, who stated that one masked person demanded rooms on 11.09.2022. He produced an Aadhar card of Sanjeev Kumar. Rooms No. 202, 203, 205, 206 and 102 were allotted. One lady called the caretaker Nitu from Room No. 205 and asked him to open the door. The rooms were checked and persons were found unconscious. Some bottles of cold drinks and some boxes of sweets were found. These were not supplied by the Hotel. Sanjeev Kumar had taken away the key after locking the persons. The police conducted the investigation and checked the CCTV Footage. The copy of the Aadhar Card was found to be fake. Sanjeev Kumar had taken mobile phone and ATM cards of the victim and absconded. Information was given by the Police of Police Station Meerut that the present petitioner was arrested in FIR No.208/2022, dated 08.12.2022 under Sections 420, 328, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, who disclosed that he had committed the offence at Solan. The production warrant was obtained. The petitioner was interrogated. The petitioner identified the rooms and the place where the mobile phone was thrown. Three keys to the rooms were found in possession of the petitioner. Blood and gurine samples were sent to SFSL, Junga and Lorazepam and iTramadol were found in the samples. The challan has been presented against the petitioner, which is fixed for consideration of charge on 02.11.2023.

3. I have heard Mr. Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State.

4. Mr. Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. No recovery was effected from him. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Deput

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top