IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr MP(M) No. 662 of 2008 a/w Cr.M.Ps (M) No.663, 664 and 665 of 2008 Date of decision: 9th July, 2008 1 Cr.M.P.(M) No. 662 of 2008 Joga Singh vs State of H.P. 2 Cr.M.P.(M) No. 663 of 2008 Anil Singh vs State of H.P. 3. Cr.M.P.(M) No.664 of 2008 Narender Pal Singh vs State of H.P. 4 Cr.M.P. (M) No.665 of 2008 Swaran Singh vs State of H.P. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surinder Singh,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner(s) S/Sh.Sanjeev Rana & .Mohan Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Shri J. S. Guleria, Law officer. Surinder Singh, J. (oral) In FIR No.150 of 2008 dated 98.4.2008 registered in Police station Paonta Sahib, under sections 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners above named were arrested. Their bail application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. Now they are seeking bail by moving these petitions in this court. It is contended that there is no evidence even remotely suggesting their involvement, with the alleged commission of offence. On the date of alleged occurrence, deceased along with his brother entered at the place, where the ladies were dancing in a marriage party. He was under the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?yes. 2 influence of alcohol and started misbehaving with them. When he was asked by the respectable persons present there, to go back, in turn he and his brother started misbehaving, thus in a spurt of movement there was a sudden quarrel, wherein the deceased sustained injuries and later succumbed to it. Shri J. S. Guleria, learned Law Officer has filed the status report and objected the bail. I have given considered his contention and perused the investigating file. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 8.4.2008 at about 11.20 p.m. the petitioners were present in a marriage party of the son of Niranjan Singh in village Shivpur. After taking their meals, the guests had returned to their respective home, ladies were engaged in dancing. Naresh Kumar deceased was under the influence of liquor, he came there with his brother and started dancing, which was objected to by the petitioner Swaran Singh. Thereafter he was caught hold of by Swarn Singh from his shirt and threw him on the floor of the house. Then he gave him fisticuffs and kick blows and petitioners Anil Kumar and Narender Pal also joined them and started fisticuffing the deceased and dragged him to the field nearby. Rajiv Kumar, Pawan Kumar and Radha Krishan witnesses tried to save Naresh Kumar from the clutches of the petitioners, in that scuffle they also sustained injuries. Joga Singh petitioner proclaimed that Naresh Kumar was going to die, no body should have any objection. Naresh Kumar was taken to the Civil Hospital Paonta Sahib where he was declared dead. The matter was reported to the police. They reached the hospital. On their request the post-mortem of the dead body was got done. Doctor opined that cause of death was shock because of head injury and injury to the testicles leading to cardio respiratory failure. Viscera of the deceased was preserved and 3 sent for chemical analysis. As per report of the Chemical Examiner, it contained alcohol. 2. From the facts on record, it appears that the deceased had shown some indecency in a drunken state while entering in the area where the ladies were dancing which was objectionable and gave a cause for a sudden fight. There was no premeditation or preparation to commit the alleged offence. Thus this case may fall within the category of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. 3. Keeping in view the over all facts and circumstances of the case, the bail-petitioners can be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the amount of Rs.10,000/- each with one surty each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan, The bail shall be subject to the following conditions that the bail petitioners shall: a) make themselves available for the purpose of interrogation, as and when required by the Investigating agency; b) not directly or indirectly make any inducement or promise acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or police officer. In case the petitioners shall flout any of the aforesaid conditions, liberty of bail shall be cancelled. Any observation made hereinabove shall not effect on the merits of the case. The petitions are accordingly disposed of. Copy Dasti on usual charges. July 9, 2008 (Surinder Singh),J. (D) 4