Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. MP(M) No.815 of 2008 Dated of Decision: August 18, 2008. Sanjay Kumar. …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the Petitioner : Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer. Surinder Singh, J (oral): In FIR No.318/08 registered on 4.7.08 under Sections 364,302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, in Police Station Sadar Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., the petitioner is apprehending his arrest, therefore he moved this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for his anticipatory bail. In brief, the prosecution story is that Tek Chand (deceased) the husband of Smt. Chanchla Devi complainant had lent money to many persons. On 3.7.2008, at about 2 P.M., the deceased left his house in his car on the pretext to meet his Advocate, but he did not return thereafter. His Cell phone repeatedly gave the message “not reachable”. The complainant got perturbed. She contacted her nephew Ramesh Chand, who is also a Pradhan. They started 2 searching for the deceased when they failed to locate, ultimately, an FIR was lodged on 4.3.2008 in the police station suspecting his murder. Initially the FIR was lodged under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code. Police searched for the deceased. On 28.7.2008, one Balbir Singh was arrested. On 29.7.2008 the putrefied dead-body of Tek Chand was found from the lake at Sunder Nagar. The autopsy of the dead-body was got done. The viscera and lungs were sent for the chemical examination. The report is still awaited, however, the ante mortem injuries were found on the chest of the body. The Doctor confirmed it a case of homicidal death, thus the FIR was converted to Section 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. During the investigation it came to notice that the petitioner alongwith his friend Subhash was also involved into the benami transaction of the properties of the Royal family of the Mandi town for Rs. 3 crores, whereas its value was more than Rs.10 crores. A case was also registered against Subhash and the petitioner herein vide FIR No.332/08 dated 11.7.2008 under various penal sections of the Indian Penal Code, Prevention of Corruption Act and Benami Transaction Act. The petitioner and his friend Subhash were not having enough income from the known sources. So far the investigation points out that they also took loan from the deceased Tek Chand. 3 The police during the investigation took into possession the details of the bank accounts of the petitioner on 11.1.2008. The petitioner deposited Rs.25 lacs on 11.1.2008 in cash. He also opened a new account in the bank on 17.8.07 and deposited Rs.1,32,45,814/- upto 8.7.2008 later he withdrew the amount leaving behind the balance of Rs.3,201/-. The house of the petitioner was searched by the police. An affidavit dated 11.4.2008 was recovered. As per the affidavit, the petitioner was having income of Rs.3,35,000/- per annum. The doubt against the petitioner has further compounded that the petitioner and Subhash were absconding from the day Tek Chand was found missing and even from his known cell numbers, the last call was made to his wife on 3.7.08 and thereafter the cell number 98166-59995 remained switched off. The police is apprehending conspiracy in the death of Tek Chand in which petitioner is one of the link. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, keeping in view the facts of the case, the above circumstances, gravity of the offence and the attending features of the case, the custodial interrogation would be qualitatively more elicitation oriented; therefore, the application for pre-arrest bail is dismissed. August 18, 2008. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.