IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 893 of 2011. Date of decision: 11.11.2011. Rohit Aukta …..Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Balwant Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). This is an application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 211/2011 dated 1.11.2011 registered at Police Station, Jubbal, under sections 341, 323, 506, 509 IPC and section 3(1(ix) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. It has been stated in the application that petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence. There is no legal evidence on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… 3. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. It has been stated that petitioner was granted interim bail on 3.11.2011 and he has joined the investigation. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The status report has been filed. It has been stated that case has been registered on the complaint of Jiwan Singh on 1.11.2011. He has stated that on 1.11.2011 at about 9.45 a.m. he was given beatings by Rohit, Devash and Sanjay with slaps, kicks and fist blows. His sister-in-law Rita Devi was also on the spot. The complainant ran towards his house. The complainant returned alongwith his wife Usha Devi, all the accused again stopped him on the way and gave him beatings. Sanjay gave him beatings with wooden plank. The accused named his father by caste, Sanjay gave fist blow on the chest of his father. Devash attempted to attack his father with danda, which was held by Bahadur, who was present on the spot. The accused belongs to high caste, whereas complainant belongs to scheduled caste. 5. It has been stated that spot map has been prepared, broken bangles of Smt. Usha Devi have been taken into possession so also wooden plank used by Sanjay. The statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. of the witnesses have been recorded. Devash Kumar alias Sonu, Sanjay Kumar alias Sanju were arrested on 2.11.2011. The `danda’ used by Devash has also been taken into possession. The accused Devash is involved in FIR No. 5 dated 21.1.2011 registered at Police Station, Jubbal under Section 21 of NDPS Act. …3… Accused Rohit has joined the investigation. It has been stated by the learned Addl. Advocate General that investigation in the case is almost complete and now castes certificates are to be taken into possession. The prayer has been made for rejection of the bail application. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The allegations against the petitioner are that he alongwith two other accused gave beatings to complainant and his father and called them with their caste. The accused belongs to high caste, whereas complainant belongs to scheduled caste. The recoveries in the case have already been made. The petitioner has joined the investigation. He was granted interim bail on 3.11.2011. There is no allegation in the status report that petitioner has misused the interim bail or he is not cooperating in the investigation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. 7. Thus, the petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 211/2011 dated 1.11.2011 registered at Police Station, Jubbal, under sections 341, 323, 506, 509 IPC and section 3(1(ix) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this court during the course of the day today with the conditions that petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when directed by the …4… investigating officer and shall not hamper the investigation or tamper the prosecution evidence in any manner. 8. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion over the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of. Copy dasti. November 11, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.