Cr.M.P.(M) No.479 of 2008 21.5.2008 Present: Mr.Ashutosh Burathoki, counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Vivek Thakur, Addl.A.G. for the respondent. This application for grant of bail has been filed in respect of FIR No.102 of 2008 registered at Police Station, Palampur on 18th April, 2008 under Sections 427, 436 and 506 IPC. The prosecution version is that the accused-petitioner set on fire a “Shamiyana” (tent) which had been erected at the house of Complainant Kamla Devi on the occasion of the marriage of her son Pardeep Kumar. It is further alleged that the accused had previously had altercation with the complainant and had earlier also threatened the complainant. Without going into the merits at the stage of deciding this bail application, at this stage it cannot be said with certainty that the petitioner is guilty of an offence punishable with life imprisonment. No doubt, the petitioner is charged with having committed an offence punishable under Section 436 IPC but the moot question which shall arise before the trial Court will be whether a Shamiyana is covered by the term ‘building’ in Section 436 IPC. At this stage it would not be appropriate to express my opinion one way or the other. However, this question is an important question which shall be decided at the stage of trial. If the trial Court comes to the conclusion that Shamiyana is not a building then the sentence provided is much less and the rigors of Section 437 Cr.P.C. would not apply. Investigation is almost complete and the petitioner has been behind bar for more than one month. Keeping in view all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that the petitioner should be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Magistrate at Palampur. This bail is granted subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall: i) make himself available for the purpose of interrogation by the Investigating Officer, as and when called upon to do so by a written Hukamnama. ii) not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Investigating team or court; iii) not attempt to hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever or tamper with the prosecution evidence; iv) not delay the trial of the case in any manner whatsoever; and v) not leave India without prior permission of this Court. Copy Dasti on usual charges. May 21, 2008. (Deepak Gupta), PV Judge