Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Gulva – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
1. Applicant-Gulva has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) for releasing him on bail, in case FIR No.80 of 2024, dated 10.09.2024, registered under Sections 64, 351 (2), 332 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (hereinafter referred to as BNS), 376 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (hereinafter referred to as the POCSO Act’) with Police Station, Kihar, District Chamba, H.P., on the ground that he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case.
2. According to the applicant, he is from respectable family, having deep roots in the society and is permanent resident of the address, as mentioned in the application.
3. The applicant, has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.
4. The applicant has further pleaded that the investigation, in the present case, is complete and the competent Court of law has taken the cognizance and charges have been framed against him. Some of the prosecution witnesse
The court granted bail based on the applicant's health condition and the lengthy trial process, imposing conditions to prevent witness tampering.
The court emphasized that pre-trial detention is prohibited as punishment, allowing bail based on the slow pace of the trial and change in circumstances while ensuring societal protection through str....
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.
Indefinite pre-trial custody is prohibited; bail may be granted with conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent witness tampering.
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 presumption of innocence and completion of investigation justified granting bail, emphasizing that pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
Bail cannot be denied as a punitive measure; the prosecution must establish its case independently, and the completion of investigation warrants release.
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 presumption of innocence prohibits pre-trial punishment, and bail may be granted with conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.
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
