Himachal Pradesh High Court on November 3, 2020 has granted bail to an accused person who has been booked for allegedly committed an unnatural act with his own cow in a cowshed.
Justice Anup Chitrakara has observed that the accused is a married man and he is residing with her wife and there are no criminal charges against him including sexual offense depicting pervert mind.
Facts of the case are as follow: -
The complainant (Jai Ram) on August 7, 2020, informed the police post-Sihunta, falling within the jurisdiction of Chowari District Chamba, that the petitioner who is a mansion in his neighbor and when in the morning he went toward his cowshed he noticed that the accused was involved in an unnatural act with his cow. He confronted the accused of this act but he ran away from the spot. Based on this information the police registered an FIR against the accused. The accused was booked under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and was arrested on August 7, 2020. Earlier the accused (Jai Ram) has also filed a petition under Section 439 (Special Power of High Court or Court of Session regarding Bail) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the concerned Session Judge however the Session Judge Chamba division Himachal Pradesh on September 5, 2020, dismissed the petition. Section 377 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 says that whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment of either description which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to pay fine.
Himachal Pradesh High Court relying on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others v. the State of Punjab (1980 (2) SCC 565), daddy Bell decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstances justifying the grant or refusal of the bail the court observed that” Although the allegation against the petitioner is grave this court cannot lose the sight of the fact that petitioner was not employed as a servant by the complainant and does his access to the cowshed could not have only been easily noticed in the morning and secondly that he is a married man with his wife residing with him."
However, the court further remarked that "There is no allegation of any criminal history including sexual offence depicting pervert mind. These factors, without extending them further, make out a case for bail."
Thereafter the Court said that after analyzing the entire evidence there is not any further justification about the incarceration of the accused no he is going to achieve any significant purpose from the act. the court said that without commenting on the merits of the case at this stage of investigation and the period of detention he faced in jail, the Court after analyzing all things allowed bail to the accused person ( Jai Ram).