Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Devender – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 77 of 2023, dated 11.7.2023, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 323, 504, 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), registered at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan, H.P. The petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The prosecution has collected insufficient evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of a crime. The medical reports do not establish any involvement of the petitioner. The informant did not mention the petitioner’s name in his statement recorded under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. The eyewitnesses stated that they could identify the person who had committed the offence, but no test identification parade was conducted. The police recovered the clothes of the petitioner, but no blood was found on them. An angle iron rod was also stated to have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner, but the blood was found insufficient for serological examination. The petitioner belongs to a poor family. He has been in judicial custody for one ye
The court emphasized that the gravity of the offence and the prima facie evidence against the petitioner justified the denial of bail, despite claims of insufficient evidence.
The court ruled that bail should be denied in cases involving serious charges like murder, especially when there is substantial evidence against the accused.
The court denied bail due to the serious nature of the crime and the petitioner's responsibility for trial delays, emphasizing the need for justice and the accused's presence.
Bail applications require a material change in circumstances for reconsideration after a previous denial, ensuring the accused's presence during trial without undue delay.
A subsequent bail application requires a material change in circumstances; the gravity of the offence can preclude bail even after prolonged custody.
The court emphasized that bail is denied based on the seriousness of the charges, evidence of involvement, and the need to protect witness safety.
The court affirmed that in serious offenses, circumstantial evidence and severity of potential punishment must prevail in bail considerations, denying the petitioner's release amid serious accusation....
The court emphasized that bail should be denied in serious criminal cases where there is a risk of witness intimidation and ongoing prosecution, as established in relevant Supreme Court precedents.
In serious charges like murder, bail cannot be granted based on trial delays; the nature of the offence dictates the court's discretion over bail.
The court emphasized that bail in heinous offences against minors is not granted lightly, considering the nature of the crime and the right to a speedy trial.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
