IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) Nos. 677, 678 of 2011. Date of decision: 5.9.2011. 1. Cr.MP(M) No. 677 of 2011. Rahul Kapoor ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. 2. Cr.MP(M) No. 678 of 2011. Daljeet Singh ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner(s) : Mr.Vaneet Vashisth vice Mr. V.B.Verma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). This judgement shall dispose of Cr.M.P. (M) No. 677 and 678 of 2011 filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C, which have arisen out of FIR No. 211 dated 16.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Sadar Mandi, under Sections 292, 509,170, 34 IPC. The status reports have been filed in both the petitions and same have been perused. 2. In Cr.MP(M) No. 677 of 2011, it has been stated that petitioner is working as relationship manager in Vodafone company at Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… Delhi. The case has been registered against the petitioner and five others at Police Station, Sadar Mandi. The petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The four accused in the case have been released on bail by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Mandi on 19.8.2011. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest on account of registration of the case. 3. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation, no recovery is to be made from him. The detention of the petitioner is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. In Cr.MP(M) No. 678 of 2011, it has been stated that as per police case, the complainant and his family members had gone towards Rewalsar on 14.8.2011. They were taking dinner in Visco Resort at 10.00 p.m., six boys, who were sitting on a table opposite to the table of the complainant in the resort followed the complainant and his family members in vehicle. They made obscene gesture. The complainant intimated the police of Police Station, Sadar Mandi. 5. On returning to his house, a telephonic call was received by the complainant from mobile phone No. 98163-80110, the caller disclosed that he was Dy. S.P., Asish. The boys belong to respectable family and it was useless to file any complaint. In pursuance of the complaint, the case was registered against all six boys. 6. On apprehension of his arrest, the petitioner filed bail application, which was rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandi on 24.8.2011. It has been stated in the application that …3… petitioner is innocent, he has committed no offence. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court, if he is released on bail. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 7. The bail applications have been opposed by the learned Addl. Advocate General on the basis of status reports. It has been stated that case has been registered on the basis of statement, under Section 154 Cr.P.C. of Sham Angra, who has stated that six boys on 15.8.2011 at 10.00 p.m. in Visco Resort made obscene gestures in the presence of female family members of the complainant and his friends when they were taking their dinner in the Resort. They made such gestures even outside the resort also and followed the complainant party in the vehicle and used obscene language. 8. The son of the complainant received phone from mobile No. 98163-80110 on mobile phone No. 98167-00077, the caller told that he was Dy. S.P., Ashish. The caller said that no purpose will be served by lodging the complaint as the boys belong to well known families. The accused Inderjeet Singh, Kanav Arora, Kapil Arora and Lokesh Mahajan have been released on bail on 19.8.2011 and the car No. HP-33B-0002 has been taken into possession and released in favour of the owner by the order of the court. 9. It has been stated that all accused followed the complainant party in the car and made obscene gestures. The accused Daljit Singh impersonated himself as Dy. S.P. It has not been stated in the status report that petitioner Rahul Kapoor has not …4… cooperated in the investigation nor there is any specific averment in the status report that any recovery is to be made from the petitioners. The mobile phone No. 98163-80110 and calls made from the said mobile phone can be connected by obtaining record from the service provider. 10. In these circumstances, both the petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applications being Cr.MP(M) Nos. 677 & 678 of 2011 are allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners in FIR No. 211 dated 16.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Sadar Mandi, under Sections 292, 509,170, 34 IPC, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the conditions that petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall not hamper the investigation or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. Copy dasti. September 5, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.