Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Gagan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Virender Singh, J.)
Apprehending his arrest, in case FIR No.18/2025 dated 11.03.2025 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Section 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’), with Police Station Janjehli, District Mandi, H.P., applicant-Gagan Kumar has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’).
2. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the I.O/police of Police Station Janjehli, District Mandi, H.P., to release him, on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case/FIR.
3. The said relief has been sought on the ground that he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case. He has termed the entire allegations, levelled against him, as false and concocted one.
4. According to the applicant, he is from a respectable family, having deep roots in the society. In addition to this, he has pleaded that he is having no
Bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment; the necessity of custodial interrogation must be established for denial.
The court granted bail based on the applicant's lack of criminal history, the victim's inconsistent testimony, and the principle against pre-trial punishment.
The presumption of innocence prohibits pre-trial punishment, and bail may be granted with conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.
Indefinite pre-trial custody is prohibited; bail may be granted with conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent witness tampering.
The court ruled that the police did not establish a need for custodial interrogation, allowing the applicant's bail application under specific conditions.
The presumption of innocence mandates that bail should not be denied as a form of punishment before trial, and specific conditions can be imposed to ensure compliance.
The court ruled that bail can be granted when specific allegations are lacking and the applicant cooperates with the investigation, emphasizing that pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and ruled that pre-trial punishment is prohibited, allowing bail due to the lack of supportive evidence from the victim and her parents.
The court denied bail based on the severity of charges against the applicant, his status as an absconder, and the potential risk of witness coercion.
Bail cannot be denied as a punitive measure; the prosecution must establish its case independently, and the completion of investigation warrants release.
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
