1 2025:HHC:30707 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No. 1987 of 2025 Reserved on : 4.9.2025 Decided on : 9.9.2025 Jabru ..Applicant Versus State of H.P. ..Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________ For the Applicant : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Dy. A.Gs, for respondent No. 1/State. None for respondents No. 2 and 3. 2 2025:HHC:30707 Virender Singh, Judge Applicant has filed the present application, under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’) for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 12 of 2025, dated 1.4.2025, registered under Sections 65(1) and 351 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’), and Sections 4 and 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (hereinafter referred to as ‘the POCSO’) with Women Police Station, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, at the instance of complainant/respondent No. 3. 3. The relief of bail has been sought on the ground that the child victim was married to the applicant and is living with him, in his house. Not 3 2025:HHC:30707 only this, the applicant has also pleaded that she has given birth to a baby boy. 4. Elaborating his further stand, it has been pleaded that elder daughter of the complainant is already married to the elder brother of the applicant, and there was proposal of exchange that the sister of the applicant would marry son of the complainant and in return, the victim was married to the applicant, and the victim is residing happily with the applicant. However, a dispute arose and when, the proposal of marriage of the sister of the applicant, did not materialize with the son of the complainant, thereafter, the present case has been lodged. 5. Relief of bail has also been sought on the ground that there is no legal proof with regard to date of birth of the child victim to be 1.7.2009. 6. It is the further case of the applicant that investigation is complete and nothing is to be recovered from him, or at his instance. All these facts have been highlighted to show that no useful purpose 4 2025:HHC:30707 would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period. 7. On the basis of above facts, Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 8. When, put to notice, complainant, as well as, victim, i.e. respondent Nos. 2 and 3, have not bothered to oppose the bail application, however, respondent No. 1 has filed status report, disclosing therein that on 1.4.2025, mother of the child victim, alongwith a worker of Child Helpline, Chamba made a complaint, before the Police, disclosing therein, that she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the complaint. Her husband is stated to be earning his livelihood by keeping livestock. The complainant is stated to have eight children, out of which, three are stated to be married. The child victim is aged about 16 years. 5 2025:HHC:30707 8.1 As per the complainant, the child victim, on 31.3.2025, apprised her mother that she was taken to jungle by one Reshma, on the pretext of collecting fuel wood, where, her real brother Jabru (applicant) was hiding himself. Jabru caught her and raped her and also threatened to kill her, in case, she discloses this fact to any one. Due to fear, she could not disclose this fact to anyone. 8.2 It is the further case of the complainant that the child victim also disclosed to her that Jabru (applicant) used to threaten her by compelling her to meet him, otherwise, he would kill her. When, the child victim disclosed this fact to the complainant, she and her husband gave a message to the family members of Jabru (applicant), who, allegedly told them that they are free to get justice, as they are not afraid of anyone. She has also disclosed that her elder daughter was married to elder brother of the applicant, who was also allegedly threatened and 6 2025:HHC:30707 beaten up by her in-laws, as they want to bury the matter. 8.3 On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to take action against the applicant. 8.4 On the basis of above facts, FIR was registered. Statement of the child victim was recorded under Section 180 of BNSS. She was taken to Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru, Medical College, Chamba, for her medico-legal examination, where, she has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. However, the Doctor has collected her blood samples on FTA card. She was produced before the Court of learned JMFC, Chamba, on 2.4.2025, where her statement, under Section 183 BNSS, was got recorded. Accused was arrested and he was also medico-legally examined. He was produced in the Court, on 3.4.2025, from where, he was remanded to police custody. The child victim was produced before CWC in the custody of her mother. Thereafter, correspondence was made to obtain her date of birth. However, no record was 7 2025:HHC:30707 found in the hospital at Chamba, regarding the record of date of birth of the child victim. As per the copy of the Pariwar Register, date of birth of the child victim, was found to be 1.7.2009. 8.5 On 4.4.2025, the spot was visited and spot map was prepared. 8.6 Accused Reshma is stated to have been released on bail, by the learned Sessions Judge, Chamba. 8.7 On 8.4.2025, the Secretary of Gram Panchayat concerned was requested to provide the birth certificate. In addition to this, proof regarding date of birth of the child victim, was also sought from the Govt. Primary School, where she was studying. 8.8. As per the birth certificate, date of birth of the child victim, was found to be 1.7.2009 and on the date of incident, she was found to be 15 years and nine months. It has also been mentioned in the status report that the child victim had never attended the school. Thereafter, the school record was 8 2025:HHC:30707 obtained, according to which, there is no record suggesting that the child victim had ever attended the school, w.e.f 2005 to 2025. 8.9 The child victim was not having any mobile phone, however, CDRs of mobile phone of her father and applicant were obtained, and it was found that no conversation had ever taken place, between the two. 8.10. Charge sheet is stated to have been filed, on 27.5.2025. There are total 22 witnesses and the case is now fixed for Consideration on Charge. 9. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application, as according to the Police, the applicant has committed the heinous offence and in case, he is released on bail, he may coerce the child victim, as well as, the witnesses, and allure them to depose, in his favour. 10. Investigation in the present case is complete, as such, no useful purpose would be served by 9 2025:HHC:30707 keeping the applicant in judicial custody, as pre-trial punishment is prohibited, under the law. 11. Applicant is permanent resident of District Chamba, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for trial. 12. In this case, a specific stand has been taken by the applicant with regard to proposal of his marriage with the child victim and according to his stand, the child victim is residing with him, alongwith their newly born child, in his house. 13. The stand taken by the applicant, qua the fact that elder daughter of the complainant is married to the elder brother of the applicant, stood probabilized from the stand, as taken by the complainant, in the complaint. 14. The probable stand of the applicant, qua the fact that he has solemnized marriage with the child victim, cannot be ignored, at this stage. 10 2025:HHC:30707 15. The another fact, which has rightly been highlighted in this case, by the learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the applicant that the applicant had married the child victim and is living in the house of the applicant, also stood probabilized from the fact that despite service of notice, neither the complainant nor the child victim had put appearance, before this Court, to oppose the bail application and to contradict the stand, as taken in the application. 16. Chances of conclusion of trial are no so bright, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 17. It is no longer res-integra that at the time of deciding the bail-application, detailed discussion about the evidence, so collected by the prosecution, during the investigation, should be avoided, as it would cause prejudice to the case of the applicant, as well as, the prosecution. 11 2025:HHC:30707 18. The cumulative effect of aforesaid discussion is that the applicant is able to make out a case for bail. Consequently, the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 19. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 12 of 2025, dated 1.4.2025, registered under Sections 65(1) and 351 (3) of the BNS, and Sections 4 and 17 of POCSO Act, with Women 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. 20. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) Applicant shall 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) Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) 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 Officer, and 12 2025:HHC:30707 d) Applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 21. 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. 22. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found to be violated by the applicant. 23. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of District Jail, Chamba, H.P. through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 24. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of District Jail, Chamba, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, 13 2025:HHC:30707 Chamba. The Superintendent of the District 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 September 9, 2025 Kalpana KALPANA Digitally signed by KALPANA Date: 2025.09.09 14:44:25 +0000