The accused whether it is a male or female, they have to furnish all conditions and furnish personal bond for having anticipatory bail. This honorable judgement was passed in the case of Ganga Devi Versus State of Himachal Pradesh [Cr.MP(M) No.348 of 2021] by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
The petitioner filled the petition and approached the Court for the purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B, 107 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 06 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Gohar, District Mandi, H.P. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had post grant of anticipatory bail duly joined the investigation. The Learned Additional Advocate General, as of now no recovery etc. is to be affected from her.
The court opinioned that, “Taking into consideration these facts, this petition is allowed and order dated 23.02.2021, passed in FIR No. 06 of 2021, dated 18.01.2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B, 107 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 06 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Gohar, District Mandi, H.P., is made absolute The conditions for referring to bail was provided as Petitioner shall furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court, within a period of two weeks from today. She shall make herself 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) She shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever. She 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 She shall not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Court.”
The court disposed of the case stating that, “It is clarified that the findings which have been returned by this Court while deciding this petition are only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and learned trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the findings so returned by this Court in the adjudication of this petition during the trial of the case. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.”