IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Ram Karan – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Virender Singh, J.)
Applicant-Ram Karan, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ' BNS S '), with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.207 of 2024, dated 25.08.2024, registered, under Sections 103 , 127(2) , 125(b) , 61(2) , 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ BNS ’), 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. The applicant has termed the entire case of the prosecution as false and frivolous, as there is nothing on the record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime.
4. It is the further case of the applicant that the prosecution could not collect any evidence to connect him with the alleged offence.
5. According to the applicant, he is a young man of 23 years and in case, he is kept in the judicial custody, it would adversely affect his future.
6. As per the applicant, investigation, in the present case is complete and nothing is to be recovered from the applicant or at
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.
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.
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.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; completion of investigation and similar treatment of co-accused warrant granting bail with conditions.
Pre-trial custody is prohibited as punishment; bail may be granted if investigation is complete and no purpose is served by continued detention.
Bail should not be denied as punishment before trial; completion of investigation and absence of commercial quantity justify granting bail.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the prohibition of pre-trial punishment, allowing bail based on the completion of investigation and parity with co-accused.
The court established that pre-trial punishment is prohibited and justified the bail grant based on completed investigation and parity with a co-accused.
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.