N THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No.149 of 2010. Date of Decision: 11th March, 2010. Shyam Lal .. Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh .. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral) . The petitioner is involved in the case under Sections 302, 392, 120B and also under Sections 411, 212 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in terms of FIR No.24 of 2009, registered in Police Station, Ram Shehar. He was declined bail by the Court of Sessions on 17th November, 2009. Precisely, it is alleged that the petitioner alongwith other accused persons is alleged to have stopped truck No.HP-12A-6852 on a culvert near Nerli village, in Ram Shehar. The said truck was loaded with “Sariya”. The driver of the said truck was Sikander Singh. He was de- boarded and given beatings because of which he died. Thereafter they drove off the truck full of “Sariya” and sold it to Parshotam Bhalla and Jitender for Rs.30,000/- at Kalyanpur near Kiratpur (Punjab) and 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - abandoned the truck at ‘Garamora’ near Kiratpur. Ram Singh, brother of the deceased lodged the report in the Police Station. The co-accused were arrested and the present petitioner was arrested on 16th June, 2009 from Howrah as aforesaid. During the investigation the police had also collected call details with respect to the mobiles of Dalip Kumar and Dharam Pal and also the persons to whom the “Sariya” was sold. The connecting evidence in this case is the statement of the petitioner under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and also the recovery of blood stained shirt of the deceased. The petitioner after the alleged incident is alleged to have absconded and he was arrested from Howrah. The Challan has been presented in the Court for the trial of the accused and the charge against the petitioner and his co-accused is stated to have been framed for the aforesaid offences and now fixed for evidence. In view of above facts, at this stage, it cannot be said that the prosecution could not link the petitioner with the alleged offences. The offence is of heinous nature and it is not in the interest of the society to release the petitioner on bail, as such, the petition is dismissed. The observations made hereinabove are strictly for the disposal of the bail petition and the same shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. March 11, 2010. (Surinder Singh), (rc) Judge.