Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1784 - HC - Indian LawsSeeking grant of Bail - position or power to bring pressure on the Investigating Officer or the witnesses or not - presumption of guilt - filing of the charge sheet would amount to change of circumstances or not - HELD THAT:- There is nothing in the entire charge sheet to indicate that the petitioner was in a position or power to bring pressure on the Investigating Officer or the witnesses. The records reveal that the petitioner was a Graduate and was assisting his father in running his Industry. No-doubt, there is enough material to show that the father of the petitioner is a local M.L.A. But merely on that ground, it cannot be assumed that the petitioner was in a influential position and that he was making use of the power and position of his father to misdirect the investigation or to screen himself from the legal punishment. There is no presumption that the son of a M.L.A. is in a position to wield power and influence on all and sundry. Just as, a son cannot be made liable for the sins of his father, the status and position of a father cannot act as a disability against a son to seek bail. Therefore, it was not proper on the part of the learned Sessions Judge to deny bail to the petitioner on the purported ground that the petitioner was in a position to use power and influence, in case, he was released on bail. The records indicate that the charge under section 307 Indian Penal Code came to be inserted at a later stage after recording the statement of the injured witness. There is inordinate delay in recording the statement of CW-2. Though the medical records indicate that CW-2 was in a fit condition to give his statement on 26.02.2018, his statement came to be recorded only on 03.03.2018. The statement made by CW-2 imputing allegation that the petitioner forced him to fall to his feet and on account of his refusal to heed to the demand of the petitioner, he was slapped and assaulted by the accused does not find place in the complaint lodged by CW-1 at the earliest point of time. All these circumstances indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to improve the case of the prosecution from stage to stage to bolster up the charges, solely with a view to deny bail to the petitioner. None of the parties had any intention or motive to harm or injure CW-2. Neither the petitioner nor any of the accused were armed with deadly weapons. There are no allegations against the petitioner that he used any weapon to cause injuries on CW-2. Accused No. 7 is already enlarged on bail by orders of this Court in the Petition. Therefore, having regard to all these facts and circumstances, the petitioner requires to be admitted to bail subject to conditions. The criminal petition is allowed.
|