Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Vicky – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
Applicant-Vicky has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS S ’), for releasing him on bail, in case FIR No.81 of 2024, dated 13.10.2024, registered under Sections 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (hereinafter referred to as the POCSO Act’), with Police Station, Anni, District Kullu, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, the case of the prosecution is false and he is innocent person. In order to buttress his contentions, the applicant has pleaded that the child victim had never made any such allegations, during her life time, as applicant has also accompanied the child victim alongwith his father for her treatment.
3. It is the further case of the applicant that the marriage of the child victim with the applicant was likely to take place in near future, but prior to that she had expired due to respiratory problems. It is also the case of the applicant that the police and doctor forced the father of the child victim to report the matter.
4. According to the ap
The court emphasized that in serious offences, bail should be denied to prevent potential witness tampering and to uphold societal norms, particularly when prima facie guilt is established.
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 court emphasized that bail cannot be granted in serious offenses under POCSO without compelling evidence, affirming the trial court's exclusive role in evaluating guilt.
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.
In cases involving sexual offences against minors, the court must prioritize societal safety over individual liberty when considering bail applications.
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.
Indefinite pre-trial custody is prohibited; bail may be granted with conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent witness tampering.
Bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment; the necessity of custodial interrogation must be established for denial.
Bail cannot be denied as a punitive measure; the prosecution must establish its case independently, and the completion of investigation warrants release.
The court denied bail due to the serious nature of the allegations against the applicant, emphasizing the need to protect societal interests and the potential flight risk of the accused.
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
