IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Virender Singh, J.
Gurmeet Singh Alias Chidu - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP (M) No. 567 of 2025
Decided On : 04-04-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 307, 506, 201, 324 - Arms Act - Sections 25, 27 - Bail application - Applicant seeks bail during trial for serious charges including attempted murder and use of firearms - Investigation completed, no recovery pending - Previous bail applications dismissed - Court finds no useful purpose in continued custody, applicant is a permanent resident and not a habitual offender - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 1-24)
(B) Bail - Conditions - Applicant must attend trial, not tamper with evidence, and not leave India without permission - Observations made are not an expression of opinion on merits of the case. (Paras 25-26)
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
1. Applicant-Gurmeet Singh @ Chidu, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS') with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.157 of 2024, dated 30.06.2024, registered, under Sections 307, 506, 201 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’) and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, with Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated and arrested, in the present case.
3. As per the applicant, he has no role to play in the crime, in which, he has been named as accused. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed and nothing is to be recovered from the applicant or at his instance.
4. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.
5. The applicant has also tried his luck, by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, however, the said application was dismissed on 09.09.2024. Thereafter, the applicant has filed bail application, bearing Cr. MP(M) No. 2762 of 2024, before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.12.2024.
6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.
7. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 30.06.2024, a telephonic information was received from CHC Baddi, in the Police Station, disclosing therein, that a person, from village Narangpur Thana has been brought, in injured condition, for treatment, upon which, HC Amarjeet No.48, along with other police official, reached at CHC Baddi.
7.1. Thereafter, a request for MLC of the injured was made to the doctor. However, the doctor declared him unfit to make statement and referred the injured to PGI Chandigarh, for further treatment.
7.2. Thereafter, HC Amarjeet Singh, reached at PGI Chandigarh, where, the opinion of the Medical Officer was obtained, who had declared the injured, as, fit to make the statement. Thereafter, the statement of Didar Singh, under Section 154 Cr.PC., was recorded, in which, he has deposed that he is agriculturist by profession. On 30.06.2024, there was a Cricket tournament in village Narangpur in a ground near Brick Kiln.
7.3. The complainant, along with his friend Kala, Gola, Sonu and Jainta had gone to watch the said match. At about 3.05 p.m., they were watching the match, while sitting on the chairs, meanwhile, Gurmeet Singh @ Chidu (applicant) and Binder came there. Gurmeet Singh @ Chidu (applicant) directed the complainant to come out, as he wants to kill him, however, his threatening has been ignored by the complainant.
7.4. Thereafter, Gurmeet Singh @ Chidu (applicant) again came at the place, where the complainant was sitting on the chair and put his pistol on the back side of the head of the complainant and another pistol was put on the thigh and said that he will kill him, as well as, his family members.
7.5. Thereafter, the applicant has fired the pistol, which was put on the thigh and the pistol put on the head did not fire. Thereafter, Gurmeet Singh @ Chidu (applicant) and Binder, fled away from the spot, along with three other persons, in a vehicle. As such, a prayer has been made to take action against the applicant.
8. On the basis of the above facts, the FIR, in question, has been registered and the criminal machinery swung into motion.
9. During investigation Forensic Expert Baddi, was requested to inspect the spot, who has visited the spot and made efforts to find out the empty cartridges, but, the same could not be recovered.
10. On 01.07.2024, the motorcycle used by Gurmeet Singh (applicant) was found in village Majri, which was taken into possession. On 02.07.2024, statemen
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete, and the accused is not a habitual offender, provided conditions are imposed to ensure trial attendance and evidence integrity.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; completion of investigation and similar treatment of co-accused warrant granting bail with conditions.
The presumption of innocence mandates that an accused cannot be held in custody indefinitely without evidence, and bail should be granted when custodial interrogation is no longer necessary.
The absence of direct evidence against the applicant and the completion of the investigation justified the grant of bail, emphasizing the principle of parity with co-accused.
The court granted bail to the applicant due to lack of direct evidence against him, emphasizing the importance of individual rights during trial.
The court emphasized that bail should not be denied as a form of punishment, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty.
The court granted bail to the applicants, emphasizing that continued custody was unnecessary due to completed investigation and similar treatment of co-accused.
The presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and bail may be granted if the contraband does not meet the definition of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
The court emphasized that pre-trial detention is prohibited under law, affirming the presumption of innocence and the need for a fair trial.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
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.