IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.545 of 2009 Date of decision : 8.7.2009. Varjinder Kumar …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh . …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K.Gautam, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mehar Chand, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K.Bansal, Addl. A.G. with Mr. R.P.Singh, Assistant, Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No.115 dated 22.5.2009 registered at Police Station, Dharamshala, under Sections 341, 447, 506 IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act, 1984. Status report has been filed. Heard and perused the record. 2. The prosecution case, in brief is that the case was registered at Police Station, Dharamshala on the basis of written complaint dated 22.5.2009 of Smt. Savita Karki, President, Gram Panchayat, Gavli – Dari. It has been alleged that the petitioner has uprooted and obstructed the public path which was constructed by the Panchayat. The petitioner wants ______________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes 2 to encroach the public path and he has threatened the villagers to do away with their lives. It has come during the investigation that one Shiv Darshan Singh had donated the land to Paychayat for public path. After some time, Shiv Darshan Singh had sold the land to petitioner who constructed his house. The petitioner has uprooted the public path in front of his house and has thus caused loss to public property. The petitioner earlier had filed an application for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dharamshala which was rejected. The petitioner has joined the investigation, no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner has filed a suit for injunction against complainant Smt. Savita Karki, President Gram Panchayat as well as against many other persons which is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kangra at Dharamshala. Smt. Savita Karki is biased against the petitioner as he did not support her in the last election. It has been submitted that even the proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C. have been got initiated by the complainant against the petitioner. The petitioner is a Government servant and is working as Lecturer Mathematics in Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Forsythghanj, Dharamshala. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. No recovery is to be made from the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 4. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the grounds that petitioner has caused wrongful loss to the public property by digging public path in front of his house which was constructed by the Panchayat. The petitioner is extending threats to the villagers and, therefore, it is not in public interest to release the petitioner on bail. 3 5. I have considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. There is nothing in the status report that the petitioner has not co-operated in the investigation. No recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It has been alleged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that civil suit and proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C. are already pending. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, application is allowed, in the event of arrest, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.115 dated 22.5.2009 under Sections 341, 447, 506 IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act, 1984, Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence. Copy dasti. July 8, 2009. ( Kuldip Singh ) (GR) Judge.