IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 1029 of 2011. Date of decision: 19.12.2011. Tikka Ram Verma son of late Shri Jita Ram, r/o village Dhar, P.O. Durgapur, Tehsil Sunni, Distt. Shimla, H.P. …..Petitioner. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner : Mr. Vinay Thakur, 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 246 dated 30.10.2011, registered at Police Station, Dhalli, under sections 307, 452, 324, 506 IPC. 2. It has been stated that as per prosecution story on 29.10.2011, the complainant was present in her room. Smt. Janki had also been staying with the complainant. The petitioner under the influence of liquor knocked the door of the room. The complainant did not open the door. The petitioner had forcibly broken open the door. He was possessing scythe and a small spade. The petitioner inflicted multiple blows with small spade on the person of the complainant. The complainant was taken to IGMC and was admitted. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… The statement of complainant was recorded and petitioner was arrested. 3. The petitioner filed bail application, under section 439 Cr.P.C., which has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla on 15.11.2011. It has been stated that learned Sessions Judge has erred in dismissing the bail application of the petitioner. 4. It has been stated that complainant was inside the house when petitioner after taking meals came to the house and knocked the door, which was not open by the complainant for about half an hour. The petitioner tried to enter the house through other door. The complainant came with the scythe and tried to attack the petitioner with the same. In the scuffle, the complainant had a fall on the stairs near the corridor of the house and sustained injuries on her person. 5. The complainant is a quarrelsome lady and had been living separately for more than seven years from the family of the petitioner. The petitioner is paying `2500/- per month maintenance to the complainant. The allegations leveled against the petitioner are false. It has been stated that even as per prosecution story, no case under section 307 IPC is made out. 6. The petitioner is 62 years aged person and physically not fit. The petitioner had taken retirement on medical grounds. The investigation in the case is complete. No purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in jail. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 7. The status report has been filed and the bail application has been opposed. It has been stated that on 29.10.2011, the …3… complainant was under treatment in IGMC and was not in a position to make the statement. The statement of the complainant was recorded, under section 154 Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2011. The complainant is wife of the petitioner. It has been stated that Duli Chand younger brother of the petitioner died about 15 years ago. After the death of Duli Chand, the petitioner started living with Shakuntla Devi wife of Duli Chand and since then he is ill-treating the complainant, who has one son and one daughter from the loins of the petitioner. 8. The complainant has stated that Women Commission has awarded `2500/- per month maintenance to her alongwith two rooms and one kitchen. She is living in that portion with her son and daughter-in-law. On 29.10.2011, she had gone alongwith her sister to cut grass. She came to her residence alongwith Janki Devi, who came to her as guest. At about 9.30 p.m., petitioner came under the influence of liquor and entered the room after breaking open the doors and windows. The son and daughter-in-law were at Delhi. 9. The petitioner was having scythe and “Khilna” (agriculture implement) with him. He gave several blows of “Khilna” on her face and head. Janki Devi concealed herself under the cot. The blood started oozing out from the injuries, she ran outside and went towards the residence of Janki, who also came there. In the meantime, other persons also came there. She was taken to IGMC, Shimla for treatment. On this, the case was registered. It has been stated that during investigation, blood stained door and window broken panes were taken into possession from the spot alongwith broken bangles of the injured. The MLC of complainant indicates four …4… injuries with sharp edged weapon and four injuries by blunt weapon. The final report would be given after X-ray and C.T. scan. 10. The petitioner was arrested on 2.11.2011 after rejection of his anticipatory bail application. The petitioner has produced “Khilna” and scythe and now he is in judicial custody. The bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge on 15.11.2011. The X-ray and C.T. scan reports have been received. The report from FSL has also been received. The final opinion of the doctor on the MLC is to be taken. The submission has been made for rejection of the bail application. 11. I have heard the learned counsel of both sides and have perused the police file. The sum and substance of the prosecution case is that complainant and petitioner are not having good relation. According to the complainant, petitioner is living with Shakuntla Devi, who is none else but the widow of younger brother of the petitioner. The complainant is living with her son, daughter-in-law in a portion of the house, which has been ordered to be given to her by Women Commission. The petitioner is also paying maintenance `2500/- per month to the complainant under the order of Women Commission. 12. Janki Devi, in her statement, under section 161 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case. The case has been registered on the statement of complainant, under section 154 Cr.P.C. The final opinion on the MLC of the complainant is yet to be taken. According to the complainant, the petitioner is not maintaining good relation with her. As per complainant, petitioner has attacked her with “Khilna” and inflicted several blows on her face and head. The petitioner is …5… also living in that very house, but in separate portion. The alleged occurrence is not very old. The investigation is not yet complete. In these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to bail at this stage. However, he shall be at liberty to renew the application for bail after some time. The application is dismissed. 13. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion over the merits of the case. December 19, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.