IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 897 of 2011 Date of decision: 11.11.2011 _______________________________________________________ Ajay Jaret ….. Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. …. Respondent. ________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No For the Petitioners : Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms.Ruma Kaushik, Addl.Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, J (Oral) This is an application for releasing the petitioner on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.97/2011 dated 1.11.2011, registered at Police Station, Kumarisain for offences punishable under Sections 353, 332, 504, 506 IPC. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case registered at the instance of complainant against the petitioner. The petitioner has no connection with the alleged offence. On account of registration of the case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in the above case. 3. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. The Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 4. The learned Addl. Advocate General has opposed the bail application on the basis of status report. It has been stated that the case has been registered on the basis of written complaint of Pardeep Kumar, Junior Engineer. It has been stated that on 1.11.2011, the complainant was working in his office. The accused entered into his office at about 2.45 P.M. under the influence of liquor and started abusing and giving beatings to the complainant with fist blows. The accused threw his files and obstructed the complainant from discharging his official duties. The other persons present in the office intervened and on this accused left the office after extending threats to the complainant that he would kill him. The complainant has received some injuries. On this, the case was registered. 5. The complainant was got medically examined, the photographs of the place of occurrence have been taken. The statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have been recorded. The copies of appointment letter and posting order of the complainant have been taken into possession. It has been stated that no recovery is to be made from the petitioner. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the police record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. In the status report it has not been stated that after obtaining the interim bail, the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation. On the contrary, it has been stated that no recovery is to be made in the case. It appears, the investigation in the case is complete. The Investigating Agency has not made out a case that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in the case. In these circumstances, the petitioner has made out a case for the grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, application is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.97/2011 dated 1.11.2011, registered at Police Station, Kumarisain for offences punishable under Sections 353, 332, 504, 506 on furnishing his personal bond in the sum of ` 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, with the condition 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 in any manner. 8. The observations made in the judgment are for disposal of the bail application and it shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy ‘Dasti’. November 11, 2011 (Kuldip Singh), (sks) Judge.