IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Freed - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
CRMPM No.944 to 952 2020
Decided On : 06-07-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction and historical context of anticipatory bail (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. rights and principles governing anticipatory bail (Para 8 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. judicial precedents and interpretation of anticipatory bail provisions (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. factual circumstances and injuries related to the case (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. arguments presented by the petitioners and their defenses (Para 38 , 40 , 41 , 44 , 46) |
| 6. court's conclusions and reasoning for bail decisions (Para 49 , 50 , 55 , 60) |
JUDGMENT
Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - These bail applications, filed by petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest, in case FIR No.78 of 2020, dated 22.6.2020, registered, under Sections 147 , 148, 149, 323, 307 & 341 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , in Police Station Majra, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh, adjudicated on the basis of common record and submissions, are being decided together by this common judgment.
2. Section 438 of the Cr.P.C, as existing on date, reads as under:
"438. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest. - (1) Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail; and that Court may, after taking into consideration, inter alia, the following factors, namely:--
(i) the nature and gravity of the accusation;
(ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence;
(iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and
(iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested, either reject the application forthwith or issue an interim order for the grant of anticipatory bail:
Provided that, where the High Court or, as the case may be, the Court of Session, has not passed any interim order under this sub-section or has rejected the application for grant of anticipatory bail, it shall be open to an officer in-charge of a police station to arrest, without warrant the applicant on the basis of the accusation apprehended in such application.
(1A) Where the Court grants an interim order under sub-section (1), it shall forthwith cause a notice being not less than seven days notice, together with a copy of such order to be served on the Public Prosecutor and the Superintendent of Police, with a view to give the Public Prosecutor a reasonable opportunity of being heard when the application shall be finally heard by the Court.
(IB) The presence of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail shall be obligatory at the time of final hearing of the application and passing of final order by the Court, if on an application made to it by the Public Prosecutor, the Court considers such presence necessary in the interest of justice.
(2) When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under subsection (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may thinks fit, including-
(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section.
(3) If such person is thereafter arres
Adri Dharan Das vs. State of W.B.
Balchand Jain vs. State of M.P.
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat and another
D.K. Ganesh Babu vs. P.T. Manokaran
Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another
Directorate of Enforcement vs. Hassan Ali Khan
Fekan Yadav vs. Satendra Yadav alias Boss Yadav alias Satendra Kumar and others
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab
HDFC Bank Limited vs. J.J. Mannan
Jai Prakash Singh (supra) State through C.B.I, vs. Amarmani Tripathi
Jai Prakash Singh vs. State of Bihar
Naresh Kumar Yadav vs. Ravindra Kumar
Nirmal Jeet Kaur vs. State of M.P & Anr
P. Chidambaram vs. Directorate of Enforcement
Pokar Ram vs. State of Rajasthan and others
Prakash Kadam & Etc. Etc vs. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta & Anr
Prem Giri vs. State of Rajasthan
Prem Girl vs. State of Rajasthan
Salauddin Abdulsamad Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra
Savitri Agarwal and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another
Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others vs. State of Punjab
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors
State of M.P. & another vs. Ram Kishna Balothia & another
State of Maharashtra vs. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain
State of U.P. vs. Deoman Upadhyaya
Sudhir vs. State of Maharashtra
Sunita Devi vs. State of Bihar & Anr
Sushila Aggarwal & Others vs. State (NOT of Delhi) & another
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.