Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.70 of 2010. Dated of Decision: March 29, 2010. Prem Kumar . …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P . ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Add. Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral): The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in FIR No.6/10, registered on 10.1.2010, in the Police Station Jawalamukhi, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, hence this application for pre-arrest bail. On 2nd February, 2010, interim bail was granted to the petitioner, in the event of his arrest, he was ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing the bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, on the condition that the petitioner shall join the investigation of this case as and when required. Thereafter, the petitioner had been joining the investigation of this case and the respondent has filed the report and the matter has been considered. Heard. 2 It is pertinent to note that initially the petitioner was not involved by the prosecutrix in the instant case, but while reporting the matter to the police, she told that she had an acquaintance with another boy named Lucky, who used to attend religious discourse at village Sadwan. She developed intimacy, Lucky aforesaid used to contact her on the telephone of one Nitu, who was working in a ‘Beauty Parlour’ and she used to pass on the message of Lucky to the prosecutrix. She also stated that on 31st December, 2009, said Nitu told that Lucky had called her to village Bani. She went on foot to Bani, but she did not find Lucky anywhere. Thereafter, she contacted Lucky on his Mobile No.98175-13761 and asked about his whereabouts. He told that he was in village Kaloha and asked her to reach there. She boarded a bus and reached Bus stand Kaloha, where she met with a lady, who asked the prosecutrix as to where she was going. She did not tell anything to her, but that said lady told her that Lucky was in village Amb. Then the prosecutrix boarded a private bus alongwith that lady and occupied rear seat. Suddenly she could see Lucky sitting on the seat ahead of her. They deboarded the bus at village Amb. Thereafter, all of them boarded HRTC bus and alighted at Una alongwith another lady, who was initially with the prosecutrix. One boy named Rimpu also met them on the way, who also accompanied them and all of them went to Chandigarh, where they reached at 11/11.30 p.m during the night. Then they went to a hotel, hired a room and all of them stayed there for night, where she was sexually molested by said Lucky. Thereafter she was taken to various other places by him and ultimately, Lucky received a telephone call on 2nd January, 2010, 3 from her brother-in-law informing him that some criminal case was registered. It was thereafter, she was sent back by bus to Una. As has been seen in the entire episode, the petitioner was not initially named anywhere in the FIR lodged on 10.1.2010. She was medically examined. Said Lucky was arrested but discharged on 16.1.2010. Thereafter, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 18.1.2010 i.e. after 8 days of lodging the FIR, it was then she exonerated Lucky and implicated the present petitioner. Skeletal age of the prosecutrix was assessed between 15 to 18 years, but as per the certificate of the birth, her date of birth is 29th June, 1995. After considering the matter against the above background, without commenting upon the merits and demerits of the case, which could ultimately prejudice any of the parties, it is suffice to say that the petitioner is apprehending the arrest in non- bailable offence, as such, he has a case for bail. Therefore, his application, for pre-arrest bail is allowed and the interim order of bail granted on 2nd February, 2010 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions and also with the following conditions that the petitioner:- (i) shall keep on joining the investigation as and when called upon by the Investigating Officer and shall present in the Court as and when called upon to do so; and (ii) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts 4 of the case so as to dissuade him from making true disclosure to the court or to any police officer. In case the petitioners shall make breach of any of the conditions aforesaid, the liberty of their bail shall be cancelled. Any observations made in this order, shall not affect the merits of this case in any manner. In case the parties apply application for urgent copies, it be supplied to them as per rules. Petitions stand disposed of. March 29, 2010. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.