IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Virender Singh, J.
Jagdish Kumar - Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP (M) No. 168 of 2025
Decided On : 19-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Sections 103(1), 115(2), 332
(C) - Bail application - Applicant alleged to have been falsely implicated in a case of physical assault leading to death - Investigation complete; applicant in custody for over six months - Medical opinion states death not caused by physical assault, but by pre-existing cardiac issues - Court finds no useful purpose in continued custody. (Paras 1, 13, 18, 20)
(B) Bail - Conditions for grant - Bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment; pre-trial punishment is prohibited - Applicant must comply with conditions regarding attendance and non-interference with evidence. (Paras 19, 21)
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
Applicant-Jagdish Kumar, 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.127 of 2024, dated 16.07.2024, registered, under Sections 103(1) , 115(2) and 332 (C) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ BNS ’), with Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated and has wrongly been arrested, in the present case.
3. As per the applicant, all the allegations, which have been levelled in the FIR, are totally false and concocted, whereas, the real fact, according to the applicant, is that he is having a shop adjoining to the Karyana shop of the deceased at Galu Chowk. Adjoining to the said shops, a common toilet of the petitioner and deceased is there. When the applicant came out of the toilet, after responding the call of nature, son of the deceased came near him and claimed his ownership on the said toilet and hot exchange took place between them.
4. It is the further case of the applicant that thereafter, the deceased and his son had beaten the applicant with the help of wooden stick, by inflicting injuries, on his head and due to those injuries, blood started oozing out from his head.
5. According to the applicant, when, he was saving himself from their clutches, deceased fell down and got sub-conscious. It is the further case of the applicant that he is already suffering from acute cardiac problem i.e. blockade to the tune of 90% and 80% in two arteries.
6. To substantiate his plea that the death was not caused on account of injuries, the applicant has relied upon the RFSL report and postmortem examination report of the deceased.
7. According to the applicant, investigation, in the present case, is complete and the applicant is in judicial custody, for the last more than six months, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody.
8. The applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.
9. The applicant has also tried his luck by moving similar application, before learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, however, his application was dismissed, vide order, dated 16th November, 2024.
10. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.
11. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 15.07.2024, SI Karan Singh, along with other police officials, had reached Medical College and Hospital Ner Chowk, in order to ascertain the factual position, as entered in Rapat No.66 on the same day. In the Hospital, the Medical Officer has declared Lekh Ram, as dead. Thereafter, the dead body was inspected and the same was preserved, in the mortuary.
11.1. The information regarding the fact that one Bhimsham Dev, who has been injured in the same incident, has also come for his treatment in Civil Hospital Rati was given to the I.O., by HC Ram Chander.
11.2. Said Bhisham Dev (complainant), son of Shri Chuni Lal, got recorded his statement, under Section 173 of the BNSS , with HC Ram Chander, disclosing therein that he is working with a private contractor. On 15.07.2024, at about 7.30 p.m., he had gone to the shop of Lekh Ram, son of Munni Lal, in order to purchase Biddi, meanwhile Jagdish Kumar son of Shri Munni Lal, under the influence of liquor, came to the shop of Lekh Ram and started throwing out the benches, tables and weighing scale from the shop.
11.3. Such act of the Jagdish Kumar (applicant) was opposed by Lekh Ram, upon which, he had started beating him and had slammed him on the ground. The complainant tried to save Lekh Ram, but, Jagdish Kumar, had inflicted a stone blow on his head also. Blood started oozing out from his head.
11.4. Thereafter, other villagers, Lal Singh and his wife also
Bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment; pre-trial detention is prohibited when investigation is complete and medical evidence suggests death was not caused by the accused's actions.
The court established that pre-trial detention is prohibited, emphasizing the need for bail when the trial is unlikely to commence soon and conditions are imposed to ensure compliance.
The court granted bail to the applicant due to lack of direct evidence against him, emphasizing the importance of individual rights during trial.
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 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.
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 court emphasized that bail should not be denied as a form of punishment, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty.
The court emphasized that pre-trial detention is prohibited under law, affirming the presumption of innocence and the need for a fair trial.
The presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and bail should not be denied as a form of punishment before trial conclusion.
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.