1 ( 2025:HHC:332 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2644 of 2024 Date of Decision : 02.01.2025 Rakesh Sharma …… Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. P.S. Goverdhan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional Advocate General, for the State. Ms. Prajwal Busta, Advocate, for the complainant/ prosecutrix. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) ASI Mohinder Joshi, Police Station, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, is present along with record. Status report stands filed. The same is taken on record. Copy, whereof, has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.127 of 2024 dated 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2025:HHC:332 ) 22.11.2024, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 4. Initially, on 25.11.2024, interim protection had been granted to the present petitioner. Brief facts giving rise to the case at hand are that the prosecutrix, in the case at hand, is a young adult married lady. She has three children out of her wedlock. She does not live with her husband since 2009. Since November 2013 till March 2024, the prosecutrix had been residing in the accommodation provided by the petitioner. It is alleged that during the aforesaid period, the bail petitioner had indulged in sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on numerous occasions. In the month of April 2024, the prosecutrix had come to Shimla for getting herself treated. On her return from Shimla to the accommodation which had been provided by the bail petitioner, she found that the locks of the same had been removed. It is upon this that the present FIR was registered. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the investigation, in the case at hand, is complete. Only report qua the contents of mobile phones of bail petitioner and prosecutrix are awaited. 6. There is clear distinction between the rape and a consensual sex. At the stage of granting bail, the Court has taken into 3 ( 2025:HHC:332 ) consideration the conduct of the parties. Prima facie, it appears that the prosecutrix had a physical relation with the bail petitioner with her own consent. Since the prosecutrix is an adult lady with sound mind, therefore, there is no question of inducing her into a physical relation. The prosecutrix, in the case at hand, despite being physically assaulted by the bail petitioner since November 2013 till March 2024, is quiet till 22.11.2024. The prosecutrix being a married woman was definitely aware of the consequences of her action. 7. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. 8. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. 9. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of his family. 10. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status report qua the social circumstances of the petitioner whereby it can be made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the confidence, that the Court may place in him to turn out to take justice at the hands of the Court. 4 ( 2025:HHC:332 ) 11. Petitioner is permanent resident of village and Post Office, Churag, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension regarding him fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the trial. In any case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 12. From the status report, so filed, it is evident that the petitioner does not have criminal antecedents. There is no possibility of flight risk in the case at hand. 13. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. Interim protection dated 25.11.2024 is made absolute, subject to following conditions:- “(i) The petitioner shall join the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law and shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency.; (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever.; (iii) The petitioners shall not contact the complainant, threaten or browbeat him or to use any pressure tactics in any manner whatsoever.; (iv) The petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.; (v) The petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer; (vi) The petitioner shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law. (vii) The petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks 5 ( 2025:HHC:332 ) thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any. 14. In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is made clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned trial Court shall decide the matter without being influenced by above observations. 15. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. Downloaded copy of this judgment is valid for compliance. (Bipin Chander Negi) January 02, 2025 (KS) Judge