IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.P. (M) No. 390/2010 Date of decision: 10. 5. 2010 Jaspal Singh ….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. J.R. Poswal, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. Surinder Singh J. (Oral) Petitioner was arrested on 25.6.2009 in FIR No. 133 of 2009 dated 20.5.2009 registered under Sections 302, 120-B read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code in Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. Petitioner was denied bail by the Court of Sessions as such he approached this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal procedure, for grant of bail. 2. Report filed. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - 3. Heard. Matter considered. 4. Precisely, case of the prosecution is that the dead body of Kripal Singh resident of Gularbala was found lying on “Androla Bridge” with gun shot injuries on his person and his motor cycle bearing registration No. HP-12B-0100 was parked nearby. Kulwant Singh, father of the deceased informed the police, got recorded his statement under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which culminated into the present FIR. Pursuant to that, the Police investigated the case, filled-in inquest form, prepared the site plan and took the photographs of the scene of the crime. Dead body was sent for autopsy. The death of the deceased was confirmed by gun shot injuries. The viscera was also sent for the chemical examination. 5. The Police interrogated various persons in the vicinity to find out the clues of the culprits. Later it came to the notice that there was a landed dispute inter se one Sodi Singh and the family of the deceased. Sodi Singh accused is alleged to have engaged Sanjeev @ Sanju and Vikram @ Vickey to finish Kripal Singh. For that, he agreed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- out of which only an amount - 3 - of Rs.20,000/- was paid in advance to execute the work. 6. Sanjeev @ Sanju and Vikram @ Vickey both were arrested. One country made 12 bore pistol along with one live cartridge was recovered from one of them. On further interrogation, police found the involvement of one Shashi and the present petitioner. Petitioner was also arrested as aforesaid. His name did not figure in the FIR. 7. On 29.6.2009 PW Jagir @ Chhibar is alleged to have walked to the Police Station and made his statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the effect that during the intervening night of 19th /20th May, 2009 while crossing the “Androla Bridge” on his motor cycle, five boys intercepted and manhandled him. In the mean time, one of the accused named Sanjeev @ Sanju told that he was not the same person to whom, in fact they wanted to finish as such Jagir aforesaid was left. He did not report the matter to the police. It is only after the arrest of the present petitioner, he is alleged to have made the aforesaid statement after 10 days of the alleged incident. - 4 - 8. Challan in this case has been presented in the Court which is pending for consideration of charge of the accused persons. At this stage, further criticism of the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police would prejudice the case of either of the parties, therefore, while avoiding it, suffice it to say that petitioner has a case for bail. Accordingly present petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan and this bail shall be subject to the conditions that the petitioner:- (a) shall present himself in the court and to the Investigating Officer as and when required to do so in this case. (b) shall not terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner. (c ) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or the Police officer. - 5 - 9. Needless to say in case he commits any breach of any of the conditions above, the liberty of bail shall be cancelled. 10. Any observation, made hereinabove is strictly for the disposal of this bail petition and shall not mean any expression on the merits of the case. 11. Let an authenticated copy of this order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan forthwith for his information and necessary action at his end. The copy be supplied to the counsel for the petitioner, if applied urgently, as per rules. The application stands disposed of. May 10, 2010 (Surinder Singh),J (cm)