High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed bail petitions filed by Devi Ram and Gopal Dass accused of offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC, considering them residents who posed no flight or tampering risk and required release.
Petitioners released on bail on personal bond of `10,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. MPs(M) No. 1080 & 1081 of 2017 Decided on: 30th August, 2017
___________________________________________________________________ 1._ Cr.MP(M) No. 1080 of 2017: Devi Ram ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent. 2. Cr.MP(M) No. 1081 of 2017: Gopal Dass …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. …Respondent.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioners (in both the petitions): Ms. Soma Thakur, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Virender K. Verma, Addl. AG, with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Dy. AG. _______________________________________________________________________ Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge (oral).
The present bail applications have been maintained by the petitioners under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking their release in case FIR No. 62 of 2017, dated 26.07.2017, under Section 3(1)(S) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989), and Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Arki, H.P.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so they may be released on bail.
position to flee from justice. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioners have committed a serious offence and they may not be enlarged on bail, so the bail applications may be dismissed.
Copy dasti.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia) 30th August, 2017 Judge
(virender)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC despite being accused of serious offences under the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Whether the petitioners pose a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing justice, warranting denial of bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Devi Ram
Gopal Dass
State of Himachal Pradesh
Chander Bhusan Barowalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
