Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.MP(M) No.54 of 2009. Dated of Decision: 06.02.2009. Karnail Singh ……… Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ………. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioner : Mr. R.K. Gautam, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Radhika Gautam, counsel for the petitioner. For the Respondent : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral) : This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in F.I.R. No.16/2009, registered on 18.01.2009 at Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., under Sections 307, 34 I.P.C. The status report has been filed in Cr.M.P. No.32 of 2009 which has also arisen from F.I.R. No.16/2009 and is fixed for today. Heard and perused the record. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in F.I.R. No.16/2009 registered on 18.01.2009 at Police Station, 2 Nalagarh, under Sections 307, 34 I.P.C. The petitioner was arrested on 26.01.2009 and is in judicial lock-up since 31.01.2009. It has been contended that a dispute had arisen in a fair in a wrestling match which took the shape of quarrel and two F.I.Rs. No.16 and 17 of 2009 were registered by the police. The petitioner was arrested on suspicion having no foundation. The petitioner is innocent. The investigation in the case is complete. The detention of the petitioner in judicial custody is no more required for the purposes of the case. The petitioner is resident of Village Joghon, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan and there is no possibility of his jumping the bail or fleeing away from the justice. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. 3. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the grounds that there are in all six accused in the case, out of them, three accused including the petitioner have been arrested and the other three accused have filed Cr.M.P.(M) No.32 of 2009 in this Court and they are on interim bail. The petitioner 3 is an influential person. He may terrorize the prosecution witnesses in case he is released on bail. The learned Additional Advocate General has prayed for dismissal of the bail application. 4. I have considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. 5. The petitioner was arrested on 26.01.2009 and he is in judicial lock-up since 31.01.2009 as per the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner which fact has not been denied. It has also not been denied that another F.I.R. No.17/2009 was also registered. In the status report filed in Cr.P.M. No.32 of 2009, nothing has been stated for opposing the bail application of the petitioner. The trial of the case will take some time. In my opinion, no purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner for indefinite period. In these circumstances, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in F.I.R. No.16 of 2009, registered on 18.01.2009 at Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, under Sections 307, 34 I.P.C., 4 on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. C.J.M./J.M.I.C., Nalagarh, with the conditions that petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner. 6. The observations made in the order shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merit of the case. 7. Copy dasti. (Kuldip Singh) Vacation Judge. February 6, 2009. (YSC)