Akhil Rana Vs State of Hp — Anticipatory Bail | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

Akhil Rana Vs State of Hp — Anticipatory Bail | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission granted to the applicant to leave India to fulfil his professional obligations as a Merchant Navy seafarer; condition (b) of the order dated 03.04.2025 in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025 substituted with conditions b(i)–b(v) (personal bond of Rs. 8,00,000 with one like surety to ACJM, Palampur; contact details; employer details; appearance through counsel without identity objection at evidence stage; video-conference appearance as directed); application disposed of in these terms, with liberty to the State to move against any violation.

Issue for consideration

Whether condition (b) of the order dated 03.04.2025 in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025 (not to leave India without prior permission) should be relaxed to permit the applicant, a seafarer in the Merchant Navy, to leave India to join his occupational assignment. +1 more

Court's answer

Merely on the basis of registration of the FIR, the applicant cannot be restrained from fulfilling his occupational obligations or made to sit idle during the pendency of the trial; to secure his presence, conditional permission to join his duties/assignment can be given.

Ratio / Principle

The apprehensions expressed by the police and the complainant can be met by imposing reasonable conditions on the applicant rather than by refusing permission outright.

Key takeaways

Application allowed and permission to leave India granted; condition (b) of the order dated 03.04.2025 in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025 is substituted with new conditions: (i) personal bond of Rs. 8,00,000 with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., with undertaking to appear especially when statement under Section 351 BNSS is recorded; (ii) furnishing mobile number and e-mail address with updates on change; (iii) furnishing complete employer details for service of notices; (iv) continued appearance through counsel and no raising of the question of identity when evidence is recorded; and (v) direction by the trial Court for appearance through video conferencing as and when required.ratio¶29
Observations made in the order are confined only to the disposal of the present application and shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case; the respondent-State may move an appropriate application if any condition is found violated.obiter¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal miscellaneous application (CrMP No. 1726 of 2025) seeking relaxation of condition (b) — not to leave India without prior permission of the Court — imposed by order dated 03.04.2025 in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025, whereby the applicant's application under Section 482 BNSS had been allowed subject to conditions. The applicant, a seafarer working in the Merchant Navy, sought permission to leave India to join an assignment from 10.05.2025, undertaking to abide by all other conditions. The State's status report showed the investigation complete with only the challan to be filed; the State and the complainant apprehended that the applicant might not be available for trial. Held (Virender Singh, Judge): merely on the basis of registration of the FIR, the applicant cannot be restrained from fulfilling his occupational obligations and made to sit idle during the pendency of the trial; conditional permission can be granted to secure his presence, and reasonable conditions can address the apprehensions of the police and the complainant. Condition (b) was substituted: personal bond of Rs. 8,00,000 with one like surety to the learned ACJM, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., with undertaking to appear especially for recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS; furnishing of mobile number and e-mail address; furnishing of complete employer details for notice; appearance through counsel without raising the question of identity when evidence is recorded; and appearance through video conferencing as directed by the trial Court. Observations confined to the disposal of the application; State at liberty to move an appropriate application on violation of any condition. Application allowed and disposed of accordingly.

Akhil Rana versus State of Himachal Pradesh

CrMP No. 1726 of 2025 in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025

07.05.2025 Present: Ms. Reeta Hingmang, Advocate, for the applicant (through video conferencing).

Mr. H.S. Rawat and Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocates General, for the respondent.

Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant.

By way of the present application, indulgence

of this Court has been sought to permit the applicant to leave India, in relaxation to the conditions imposed, by this Court, while deciding CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025, on 3^rd April, 2025.

Vide order, dated 3^rd April, 2025, the application, filed by the applicant, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), bearing CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025, was allowed, by this Court and the following conditions were imposed, on the applicant:

a) That the applicant will join the investigation of the case, as and when, called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law;

b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court;

c) That the applicant will not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or

-: 2 :-

promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and

d) That the 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.

Now, by way of the present application, condition No. (b), as contained in order, dated 3^rd April, 2025 (supra), has been sought to be relaxed, on the ground, that the applicant is a seafarer by occupation, working in Merchant Navy, as such, because of his occupational engagements, he has given his willingness to his employer that he is readily available and willing to join the assignment on and after 10^th May, 2025.

In view of the above, in order to fulfill his professional obligations, the applicant has sought the permission of this Court to leave the country.

The applicant has given an undertaking to comply with all the other conditions, imposed by this Court, while deciding CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025, vide order, dated 3^rd April, 2025.

On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.

When put to notice, the State has filed the

-: 3 :-

status report, wherein, it has been pleaded that the applicant has joined the investigation, as per the directions of this Court and the investigation is now complete, only, the challan is to be filed. However, it has been apprehended that in case, the prayer, so made, in the application is allowed and the applicant is allowed to leave the country, then, he may not be available for the trial and it would cause delay in the conclusion of the trial.

The complainant has also put appearance and put forth the same arguments and prayed that the application may kindly be dismissed.

Heard.

The investigation, in the present case, is complete and, according to the applicant, he is a seafarer, i.e.,working in Merchant Navy and due to his occupational engagements, the applicant has given willingness to his employer to join the assignment.

Merely, on the basis of the registration of the FIR, the applicant cannot be restrained from fulfilling his occupational obligations and to sit idle, during the pendency of the trial. However, in order to secure his presence, conditional permission can be given to him, to

-: 4 :-

join the duties/assignment.

So far as the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, as well as, the complainant, reasonable conditions can be imposed upon the applicant.

Consequently, the application under consideration is allowed. The permission, as sought, in the application is granted and condition No. (b), as contained in para 19 of order, dated 3^rd April, 2025, passed by this Court, in CrMP (M) No. 410 of 2025, is substituted with the following conditions:

b(i). That the applicant shall furnish a personal bond, in the sum of ₹ 8,00,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., by giving an undertaking to appear before the trial Court, as and when directed by the trial Court to do so, especially, when his statement, under Section 351 of the BNSS, would be recorded;

b(ii). That the applicant shall furnish his mobile number and e-mail address to the Court and, in case of any change, he would inform the Court, immediately;

b(iii). That the applicant shall furnish complete details of his employer, mentioning the name, designation and address of the person, alongwith his e-mail address, to whom, the Court may issue notice(s), in addition to the notice(s) to the applicant, when his presence would be required, in the Court;

b(iv). That the applicant shall continue to appear before the learned trial Court, through his

-: 5 :-

counsel and when the evidence would be recorded, he will not raise the question of his identity; and

b(v). That the learned trial Court, as and when required, may direct the appearance of the applicant, before the Court, through video conferencing.

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.

It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the conditions, is found violated by the applicant.

The application is disposed of, in above terms.

( Virender Singh ) Judge

May 07, 2025 ( rajni )