IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.M.P (M.) No. 461 of 2010. Date of Decision: 25.05.2010 __________________________________________________________ Jitender Singh. ….Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. ….Respondent. ___________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. __________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J. The petitioner has been charged for offence under Sections 376 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on 4.11.2009 the prosecutrix who is a student of 8th standard in MCM DAV School, Bagani was accosted by the accused on the way. He caught hold her and dragged her to a hillock, where she was undressed and raped by him. Somehow, she managed to escape from his clutches. It is undisputed before me that the accused is in custody since 5.11.2009, when he was arrested. The investigation is complete and the case is now listed for consideration on charge. 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 2. The petitioner filed a petition for release on bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra, who dismissed it on the ground that since it was the statement of the prosecutrix that the petitioner had ravished her forcibly, he was not entitled to bail. 3. This is pre-judging the issue. I have gone through the record and I can not subscribe myself to the principle of law relied upon by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. I need not comment on the medical evidence on the file, as it is likely to influence the outcome of the case. However, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage on a prima facie examination of the material, I can not find any thing, which prima facie establishes forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. In these circumstances, this application is allowed. A direction is issued that the petitioner be released on bail on the following conditions: (i) The petitioner will attend all dates of hearing in the Court as fixed by the learned Additional District Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala or any other Court where his case is tried. (ii) He shall regularly report to the Police Station, Nurpur as and when directed by the Investigating Officer or Station House Officer, Police Station, Nurpur, if and when so required. (iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. He will not threaten overawe or influence any witnesses. (iv) He shall not abscond from the jurisdiction of learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala. In case the petitioner requires to leave the jurisdiction of the Sessions Judge Kangra at Dharamshala, he shall specifically approach the learned Court for such permission, showing the place and purpose, for which 3 he has to leave the jurisdiction. The Court shall pass such order (s) as may be deemed just and proper. (v) The petitioner shall furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala undertaking to appear in the Court on all dates of hearing of the case as fixed by the Court or as and when so directed including the conditions as detailed herein above. 4. The bail bonds shall be furnished by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date when this order is first presented to the Trial Court. 5. It is clarified that in case the petitioner violates any of the conditions of the bail bond or of this order, he shall be arrested forthwith without reference to this Court. Petition is disposed of. Dasti copy on usual terms. May 25, 2010 (Dev Darshan Sud), (KRS) Judge