IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No.227 of 2010. Decided on: 9th April, 2010. __________________________________________________________________ Jashvir Singh ….Petitioner. Versus State of HP. ....Respondent. ______________________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Anup Chitkara, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General. ____________________________________________________________ SURINDER SINGH, J (Oral) Police report filed. Heard and gone through the record. The petitioner was arrested in FIR No.133 of 2009 dated 20th May, 2009 under Sections 302, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 25 of the Arms Act, registered in Police Station, Nalagarh. His bail was declined by the Court of Sessions, as such approached this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In short, the prosecution case is that on 20th May, 2009 at about 6.40 a.m. the dead body of Kripal Singh was found lying on “Androla bridge” with gun shot injuries and his motorcycle No.HP-12B- 0100 was also found parked nearby. The police was informed. Father of the deceased Kulwant Singh got recorded his statement under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. FIR was formally registered 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The police investigated the case. Inquest forms were filled in and the photographs of the scene of crime were taken. Autopsy of the dead body was got done in the hospital. Viscera of the deceased was sent for the forensic examination. The police interrogated various persons to find clues of the culprits. They came to know that there was a landed dispute between one Sodi Singh and the family of the deceased. Sodi Singh engaged Sanjeev alias Sanju and Vikram Singh to finish Kripal Singh, or that he agreed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/-. Out of which an amount of Rs.20,000/- was paid in advance and executed the plan with few other accused persons. Sanjeev alias Sanju and Vikram Singh, both were arrested. During their interrogation they pointed out the place of incident. One country made 12 bore pistol was recovered pursuant to the statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act alongwith one live cartridge. On their further interrogation, the police found the clue of the involvement of the present petitioner and Shashi. Their cell phone call-details were obtained. On 25th June, 2009 the petitioner was arrested. On 29th June, 2009 the statement of Jagir Singh alias Chhibar was recorded, who is alleged to have identified the petitioner during the intervening night of 19th/20th May, 2009 when he was crossing from the “Androla bridge” on his motorcycle and he was stopped and was man-handled by five boys. It is not understood as to why he kept mum despite knowing the fact of murder of Kripal Singh and also that his dead body was found near the same bridge where this witness was alleged to have been man-handled by the boys. Surprisingly, after the arrest of - 3 - petitioner, he is said to have come to Police Station and named him, after about one month and 10 days of the said incident. Now the Challan has been presented in the Court. Without commenting upon the merits and demerits of the case, suffice it to say that the petitioner has a case for bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is hereby directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan. This bail shall be subject to the following conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall be present in the Court during the trial of the case on each and every hearing; (b) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court; and (c) shall not terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner. Needless to say that in case the petitioner makes any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the liberty of his bail shall be cancelled. Any expression or observations made heretofore, shall not affect the merits of the case, as it is strictly for the purpose of deciding this petition. Let an authenticated copy be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan for his information and necessary action at his end. In case parties apply for the urgent copy of this order, it be supplied to them as per law. - 4 - At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the address given in the application is not correct and in fact the address given in the report of the police is correct. Let necessary corrections be made by the Registry in the memo of parties in accordance with the police report with red ink. The petition stands disposed of. Cr.M.P. No. 198 of 2010. Allowed. April 9, 2010. (Surinder Singh), J. (rc)