Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:HHC:16781 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP (M) No. : 1033 of 2025 Reserved on : 22.05.2025 Decided on : 30.05.2025 Ramesh Kumar
…Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. N.S. Chandel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sidharth, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Irfan Khan, Advocate for respondent No.2. Respondent No.2, has also joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing. Virender Singh, Judge. ApplicantRamesh Kumar has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him on bail, during the pendency of 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:16781 trial, arising out of FIR No.50 of 2024, dated 26.10.2024, registered, under Sections 64(2), 351(2) and 127(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station Chamba, District Chamba, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been impleaded by the Police, in this case. 3. As per the applicant, he is permanent resident of the address, as mentioned in the application, as such, he is having deep roots in the society. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that he is the only bread earner of his family and his detention would cause adverse impact upon his family. 5. As per the applicant, the investigation, in the present case, is complete and nothing is to be recovered from him nor at his instance. 6. The applicant has also tried his luck by moving the bail application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba,
3 2025:HHC:16781 however, his application was dismissed, vide order, dated 05th April, 2025. 7. Apart from this, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 8. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to release the applicant on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 9.
When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 26th October, 2024, the complainant/victim, aged about 34 years, appeared before the Police and moved a complaint, mentioning therein, that she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the complaint and is a home maker. Her husband is a teacher. 9.1. According to the complainant, accused is her brotherinlaw (Jeth) in relation and he is also a teacher. He is stated to be residing in a rented accommodation, at
4 2025:HHC:16781 Julahkadi, along with his family. On 04.07.2024, , when the prosecutrix had gone to Hospital, then, at about 11.00 a.m., accused met her outside the Hospital and took her to his home on the pretext that she was being called by his wife. 9.2. According to the prosecutrix, since they are from the same family, as such, she had gone with the accused, without any hesitation, however, when she reached at the room of the accused, no one was there. Accused made her to sit on the pretext that his wife might have gone to some neighbour. 9.3. Thereafter, when the prosecutrix had gone to washroom, then, the accused bolted the room from inside and as soon as, she came out from the washroom, he had thrown her on the bed and gagged her mouth, so that the prosecutrix could not make a noise. Thereafter, accused had raped her. 9.4. Thereafter, the accused lifted the mobile phone, which was kept on the TV Trolley and said that he had recorded everything and pressured her to dance
5 2025:HHC:16781 on his tune. Thereafter, on the pretext of making the video viral, accused used to call her and raped her on six occasions. 9.5.
According to the prosecutrix, on 10.09.2024, when prosecutrix was all alone, then at about 11.00 p.m., accused came to her home and started making efforts for forcible physical relations, upon which, she has refused on the pretext that she was having menstrual circle, but the accused had not paid any heed to her request and on the pretext of making the video viral, he raped her, due to which, she got pregnant. 9.6. Thereafter, the family members of the prosecutrix came to know about all these facts. Lastly, the prosecutrix has got recorded in her statement that on account of making the video viral, she was forced to keep silent, as she was frightened due to the said threatening. As such, she has prayed that the accused had raped her and impregnated her, as such, action be taken against the accused. 6 2025:HHC:16781
9.7. On the basis of the above facts, the police registered the FIR, in question and the criminal machinery swung into motion. 10. During investigation, on 26.10.2024, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded, under Section 180 of the BNS, which was also videographed. She was medicolegally examined and the physical evidence, so collected by the doctors, was taken into possession. Thereafter the accused (applicant) was arrested, on 26.10.2024, at 9.20 p.m. Mobile phone of the applicant was also taken into possession. Thereafter, Section 127(2) of the BNS was also added, in this case. 11. On 28.10.2024, statement of the prosecutrix was also got recorded, under Section 183 of the BNS, by producing her before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba. On the same day, the spot was also visited and physical evidence was collected and taken into possession. Spot map was prepared. 12. On 29.10.2024, residential house of the prosecutrix was also visited and spot map was prepared
7 2025:HHC:16781 and physical evidence was also taken into possession. The CDRs, as well as, consumer application form of the mobile of the prosecutrix and applicant were obtained.
The mobile number of the prosecutrix was found to be issued in the name of one Hans Raj son of Gajender Singh. 13. On 6.11.2024, medical termination of the pregnancy was got conducted and the foetus was preserved. As per the DNA report, the prosecutrix was found to be the biological mother of the aborted foetus, whereas, the applicant was found to be the biological father of the foetus. 14. The investigation, in the present case, is stated to have been completed. There are total 28 witnesses and the case is now fixed for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses at serial No.1 and 2
15. It has been mentioned in the status report that the applicant has committed a heinous offence and the case is at the initial stage and in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may coerce the witnesses. 8 2025:HHC:16781
16. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 17. In this case, prosecutrix has been impleaded as respondent No.2. On notice, she has put appearance and filed her affidavit, which was received in the Court through email. In the affidavit, the prosecutrix has deposed that the relations between her and the accused were consensual. 18. The prosecutrix had put appearance through Video Conferencing through her counsel, on 22.05.2025, when the arguments, in this matter were heard. 19. Investigation, in the present case, is complete and the police has filed the chargesheet against the accused, which is pending before the competent Court of law, in which cognizance has been taken and charges have been framed. 20. The case is stated to have been listed for PWs, as such, it can be said that the custodial interrogation of the accused is not required by the Police, in this case. 9 2025:HHC:16781
21.
No doubt, the prosecutrix has not yet been examined, but, considering the fact that she has joined the proceedings through video conferencing and filed her affidavit, contents of which have been reproduced above, in such situation, the arguments of learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant hold water as, it has been pointed out that the alleged incident had firstly taken place on 4.7.2024 and the accused allegedly, raped her on six occasions till 11.09.2024, whereas, the matter has been reported to the Police on 26.10.2024, when the prosecutrix allegedly, got pregnant. 22. Although, the prosecutrix/prosecution will have an opportunity to explain the delay in moving the FIR, during the course of trial, but, considering the fact that the prosecutrix, who has been arrayed as respondent No.2, in this case, virtually, destroyed the case of the prosecution, by stating that the relationship between her and the applicant were consensual, merely, on the basis of the DNA report, the relief, for which the applicant is otherwise entitled to, cannot be declined, as,
10 2025:HHC:16781 the report of DNA falls within the definition of corroborative piece of evidence. 24. The applicant is permanent resident of District Chamba, as such, it cannot be apprehended that he may not be available for trial, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail. 25. Even otherwise, the arguments of the learned Senior Advocate, qua the consensual relationship of the prosecutrix and the applicant, cannot be brushed aside, at this stage, keeping in view the affidavit filed by the prosecutrix. 26. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.
Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.50 of 2024, dated 26.10.2024, registered under Sections 64(2), 351(2) and 127(2) of the BNS, with Police Station Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond, in the sum of Rs.50,000/, with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. 11 2025:HHC:16781
27. This order of release, however, shall be subject to the following conditions :
“a) That the applicant regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application;
b) That the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) That the applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Office; and d) That the applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.”
28. Any of the observations made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case as these observations are confined only to the disposal of the present bail application. 29. It is made clear that the respondentState is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found to be violated by the bail applicant/petitioner. 12 2025:HHC:16781
30. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Districtcum Open Air Jail, Chamba, through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software. 31.
In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, DistrictcumOpen Air Jail, Chamba, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Chamba. The Superintendent of Jail, DistrictcumOpen Air Jail, Chamba, is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court. ( Virender Singh ) Judge May 30, 2025(ps)
Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.05.30 14:54:53 IST