Mohammad Mahfooj vs. State Of Hp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CRMPM No.: 1135 of 2021

Decided on: 29.06.2021

Sh. Mohammad Mahfooj	.…Petitioner.

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent. Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No

For the petitioner	:	Ms. Meera Devi, Advocate.
For the respondent	:	M/s<br>Sumesh Raj and Dinesh<br>Thakur,<br>Addl. Advocate Generals<br>with M/s Kamal Kant Chandel<br>Chandel, Deputy Advocate<br>General.

(Though Video Conference)

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Status report has been filed, which is perused and

taken on record.

2. Heard.

3. On instructions, learned Additional Advocate General submits that petitioner has joined the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer. Further, as of now, no recovery etc. is to be

¹ Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

effected at his instance. However, as per him, grant of anticipatory bail is not warranted in the facts of the case.

4. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and also gone through the status report.

5. It is not in dispute that after the grant of bail, the petitioner has duly participated in the course of investigation and has not created any hindrance in the same. It is further not the allegation of the prosecution that in the interregnum, post grant of anticipatory bail, the petitioner has either tried to influence any witness or has created any other impediment in the course of the investigation.

6. Therefore, keeping into consideration the fact that the investigation is now complete, this petition is allowed and order dated 22.06.2021 is made absolute, however, subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner shall furnish personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court within a period of two weeks from today.

ii) He shall make himself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and 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;

• iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever.
• iv) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and
• v) He shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court.

7. It is clarified that findings which have been returned by this Court while deciding this petition are only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail petition and learned trial Court shall not be influenced, in any manner, whatsoever, by any of the findings so returned by this Court in the adjudication of this petition, during the course of trial of the case. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner does not complies with the conditions which have been imposed upon him while granting the present bail, the State shall be at liberty to approach this Court for the cancellation of the bail. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Copy dasti.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

June 29, 2021 (narender