IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 888 of 2011. Date of decision: 9.11.2011. Sanjay Kumar ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Varun Chandel, 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. 61/11 dated 24.8.2011, under sections 402, 109 IPC and section 25/54-59 of Arms Act. 2. It has been stated in the application that as per prosecution version the police intercepted white colour Indigo car bearing No. HP-3A-923 in which few numbers were missing. The car was being driven by Sunil Kumar alias Kakku and other persons sitting in the car disclosed their names as Ajay Sharma, Kamal Dev, Sanjay Kumar, Pardeep Kumar. The police found some other incriminating material in the car. It has been alleged that accused were using fake number plate on the car. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… 3. The petitioner had earlier filed bail application before learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, which was dismissed on 30.9.2011. The petitioner is in custody since 24.8.2011, challan has already been filed by the prosecution. It has been alleged that petitioner is innocent aged about 20 years. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The further detention of the petitioner is not necessary. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds as per directions of this court. 4. The bail application has been opposed by learned Addl. Advocate General by filing status report. It has been stated that there are in all six accused and all of them are in judicial custody. It has also been stated that challan has been filed in the court on 27.10.2011 for offence punishable under section 402, 109 IPC read with section 25 of the Arms Act. It has further been stated in the status report that petitioner and his other co-accused were intercepted on 24.8.2011 at about 10.30 p.m. at Bharari. They could not produce the documents of the car. The vehicle was searched and several incriminating articles were found in the car as detailed in the status report. The car was suspected to be stolen. The car was bearing registration No. HP-3A-023 in front as well as on rear number plates. All the occupants of the car were arrested on 24.8.2011. 5. It has been stated that during investigation, Ajay Kumar, Sunil Kumar, Kamal Dev and Sanjay Kumar disclosed that from 19.8.2011 to 24.8.2011 Naveen Datiyal was with them at Shimla and the car in question has been purchased by said Naveen Datiyal. They have stolen one Honda city car from Shoghi (Shimla) in the …3… intervening night of 23/24.8.2011 and it was taken to Ghumarwin. FIR No. 180/11 has been registered at Police Station, Boileauganj regarding the said theft. Ajay Kumar is involved in two cases. Sunil Kumar is facing 20 cases at different places. Naveen Datiyal joined the investigation on 27.8.2011. Petitioner Sanjay Kumar got Honda city car parked at Bharari (Baru) at the residence of his relations on the pretext that said car belonged to his friends, who wanted to go to Manimahesh. A case against the petitioner has already been registered. There are similar allegations against other accused also. The prayer has been made for rejection of bail application. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and his co-accused constituted a gang, they lift vehicles and commit other offences. The petitioner alongwith his co-accused were intercepted by the police and incriminating articles as detailed in the status report have been recovered from the car. It has been alleged that petitioner and his other co-accused had stolen Honda city car from Shoghi, which was got parked by the petitioner at the residence of his relations at Bharari (Baru) on the pretext that occupants of the car intended to go to Manimahesh. 7. It has been alleged that 20 cases are registered at different places against accused Sunil Kumar, similarly some cases are registered against other accused also including the petitioner against whom one more case has been registered. As per prosecution, the petitioner is in the habit of committing offences of different nature. In these circumstances, it will not be in public …4… interest to release the petitioner on bail. The petitioner has tendency to commit offences of different nature and, therefore, possibility cannot be ruled out that in case he is released on bail then he will repeat the same offence, which he has committed earlier. In these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. The bail application is rejected. November 9, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.