IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 790 of 2009 Date of decision: September 17, 2009. Chet Ram & ors. …..Petitioners. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. V.D.Khidtta, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate General and Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioners on bail in FIR No. 143 of 2009 registered on 3.9.2009, under Section 3 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police Station, Theog. The status report has been filed. 2. Heard and perused the record. It is the case of investigating agency that on 3.9.2009 Tara Chand complainant lodged a written complaint at Police Station, Theog and alleged that about 80% population in the village is of scheduled castes including the family of the complainant. There is a common natural water source and drinking water scheme in the village, which is the only source of water. The house of Chet Ram and his family is adjacent to Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… the house of the complainant and he is rajput by caste. They address the complainant party by using words with the aim to insult them and do not allow the complainant party to take water from the natural source by practicing untouchability. On 20.8.2009 Naresh son of Jai Ram objected to the placing of large size window by the complainant in his own house, he ridiculed the complainant and also pelted stones on his house. He reported the matter at police post and Naresh apologized before respectable persons. On 2.9.2009, Seva Ram abused the complainant party. On the complaint of the complainant, the case was registered. It has been stated in the status report that the accused were interrogated. No recovery is to be made. The learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. They have joined the investigation and are cooperating in the investigation. The petitioners surrendered in this court on 8.9.2009 and on that date interim bail was granted to them. It has been submitted that the complainant party has falsely implicated the petitioners in order to deter the petitioners not to pursue the suit which they have filed against construction of road by the State. It has also been submitted that petitioner No. 1 had reported against the complainant and his family for cutting trees illegally and due to this reason the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners. …3… 4. I have considered the respective case of the parties. The investigating agency has come forward with the report that no recovery is to be made from the petitioners. The petitioners have joined the investigation. There is nothing in the status report that the petitioners are not cooperating in the investigation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail, under Section 439 Cr. P.C. Accordingly, interim order dated 8.9.2009 is made absolute and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 143 of 2009 registered on 3.9.2009, under Section 3 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police Station, Theog, on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.5000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this court during the course of the day today, failing which the petitioners shall be taken into custody. Copy dasti. September 17, 2009. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.