( 2025:HHC:3846 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No.253 of 2025 Reserved on : 24.02.2025 Decided on : 28.02.2025 Arpit Chandel ...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. J.L. Bhardwaj, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. H.S. Rawat, and Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Lakshay Parihar, Advocate for respondent No.2. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Arpit Chandel, apprehending his arrest, in FIR No.9/2025, dated 06.02.2025, registered under Sections 69, 89, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’), with Women Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, H.P., has filed 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 (2025:HHC:3846) the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’). 2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been named, as accused, in this case and he is apprehending his arrest in the said FIR, due to the pressure, which, according to the applicant, has been exerted upon police by the parents of the complainant. He has also alleged that the complainant is also exerting pressure on the parents of the applicant to pay Rs.12,00,000/-. 3. The applicant has termed the FIR registered against him, as false and based upon concocted facts. 4. The applicant, has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the Police/Investigating Officer, under Section 482 of the BNSS. 5. On the basis of the above facts, Mr.J.L. Bhardwaj, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, Advocate, has prayed that the applicant is a young boy of 20 years, having deep roots in the society and 3 (2025:HHC:3846) in case, protection under Section 482 of BNSS is not given to him, it may adversely affect his future. 6. On all these submissions, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 7. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 05.02.2025, from the office of Superintendent of Police, Baddi, a complaint of prosecutrix was received, in which, she has disclosed that she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the complaint and running a beauty parlor. 7.1. According to the complainant, the applicant had met her and thereafter, they had developed intimacy. A proposal for their marriage was also mooted and under the pretext of marriage, the accused had allegedly raped her. 7.2. According to the prosecutrix, whenever, she had resisted to the acts of the applicant, he used to blackmail her by saying that he will commit suicide and name her as the person responsible for his suicide. Under this pretext, according to the prosecutrix, she was sexually exploited for one year and due to the act of the applicant, she allegedly was forced to carry his foetus. 4 (2025:HHC:3846) 7.3. Thereafter, some medicine was given by the applicant to the prosecutrix, which had adversely affected her health. 7.4. The complainant has further alleged that the applicant used to extract money from her. Till the time, she used to pay the amount to him, the relations were cordial. Thereafter, the applicant/accused had allegedly started beating her. She has also alleged that the parents and sisters of the applicant also used to torture her. They also threatened that they have much money with them and no one can take action against the applicant. 7.5. Lastly, the applicant has prayed that justice be accorded to her and Arpit may solemnize marriage with her. 7.6. On the basis of the above fact, the FIR in question, has been registered and the criminal machinery swung into motion. 8. Thereafter, the investigation was entrusted to ASI Kamlesh Thakur, who had called both the parties, where both the parties had requested the police to give 5 (2025:HHC:3846) them time so that they can finalize the proposal of marriage of the applicant and prosecutrix. 9. Thereafter, both the parties had produced the compromise, according to which, the prosecutrix has refused to take any action against the applicant. On 6.2.2025, the complainant again appeared before the police and has submitted that she wanted action against the applicant. 10. It has been mentioned, in the status report, that the complainant was medico-legally examined, by the Doctors at Nalagarh. 11. During investigation, the statement of the complainant, under Section 180 of the BNSS, was got recorded, on 10.02.2025, in which, she has deposed that the applicant also raped her on 3rd February (Monday), at Bhatolikalan. In her statement, she has also disclosed that she is not got confirmed her pregnancy as neither she has visited any hospital nor any ultrasound was done. 12. So far as the compromise, which had taken place between the parties, according to the complainant, she was forced to compromise the matter. Not only this, 6 (2025:HHC:3846) she has levelled the allegations against the applicant that he is a drug addict. 13. On 10.02.2025, the opinion from the Gynecologist, regarding abortion of the complainant was obtained, who has given the following opinion:- “On history pt had taken unsuspected MTP intake in Nov 2024. Pt has resumed here regular cycles. No written OPD slips for medicine record available with the patient.” 14. As such, she has opined that it is not possible to comment on abortion. Hence, the police has deleted the provisions of Section 89 of the BNS from the FIR in question. 15. On 10.02.2025, the statement of the complainant was also recorded, under Section 183 of the BNSS, in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nalagarh. In the said statement, the complainant had reiterated the allegations, as levelled in the complaint. 16. In pursuance of the interim protection, the applicant has joined the investigation on 15.02.2025. He was also medico-legally examined. 17. In this case, the complainant has also filed the objections, in which, she has reiterated her stand, as taken 7 (2025:HHC:3846) in the complaint and reasserted the fact that the applicant has forced her to take some medicine for abortion, which resulted in miscarriage. In this regard, she has also annexed the print out of the conversation, which had taken place between them on social media platform. 18. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 19. In the status report filed, it has specifically been mentioned, that the applicant, has joined the investigation and has been released on bail by the Police. 20. The status report is totally silent about the fact as to whether the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required or not. When, no prayer has been made with regard to the custodial interrogation of the applicant, then, the interim protection, which has been given to the applicant is liable to be confirmed, as, the applicant is a young boy of 20 years. 21. The chances of commencement and conclusion of the trial, against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, no useful purpose would be served by sending the applicant in judicial custody. 8 (2025:HHC:3846) 22. Except the present case, no other criminal history of the applicant has been mentioned, in the status report. As such, presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant. 23. Since, on the basis of the medical opinion, the police had deleted the provisions of Section 89 of the BNS, in this case, as such, the allegations, which have been levelled against the applicant, by the prosecutrix, in this case, are subject matter of trial. 24. At the time of deciding the bail application, detailed discussion of the evidence, so collected, by the prosecution or about the defence, which has been taken, by the applicant, should be avoided, as, it would cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution, as well as, to that of the accused. 25. At the young age of 20 years, if the applicant is ordered to be sent to the judicial custody, it will affect his future as in the judicial custody, he would be kept in the company of hardened criminals. 26. Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 14.02.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made 9 (2025:HHC:3846) absolute, subject to the conditions mentioned in the said order. 27. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, 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 application. 28. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet will be filed in the Competent Court of Law. 29. 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 violated by the applicant. ( Virender Singh ) Judge February 28, 2025(ps)