IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Virender Singh, J.
Aakash Chauhan - Applicant
Vs.
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 445 of 2025
Decided On : 22-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Sections 105, 238, 239, and 3(5) - Bail application filed by the applicant who claimed to be falsely implicated in the case; previous bail applications were dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Bail - Conditions for granting bail - The court noted that keeping the applicant in custody would not serve any useful purpose given the completed investigation and the nature of the charges. (Paras 8-10)
Facts of the case:
The applicant is accused of involvement in the death of Rahul Kulla, whose death was attributed to a drug overdose. The applicant claimed no connection to the crime. (Paras 2, 6.10)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the investigation was complete and the applicant’s continued detention was unnecessary. (Paras 8-9)
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the circumstances of the case and the nature of the charges. (Paras 8-10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant should not be punished prior to trial and that the bail application was to be allowed. (Paras 11-12)
Result: Bail application allowed; applicant released on bail with conditions.
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
The applicant has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) in case FIR No. 31 of 2024, dated 5.7.2024, under Sections 105, 238, 239 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS”) registered with Police Station, Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, as nothing has been found in the investigation, connecting him, with the crime in question.
3. Applicant has further pleaded that he has tried his luck by filing the bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohru, which was dismissed, on 29.10.2024. Thereafter, he has moved Cr.MP(M) No. 62 of 2015, before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 9.1.2025.
4. The applicant, through his counsel, has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.
5. On all these submissions, Mr. Nitin Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has prayed that the bail application may kindly be allowed.
6. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 3.7.2024, at about 8:55 a.m., one Rajesh Kumar, Manager, Azad Workshop Prahat Pul, telephonically informed the police of Police Post, Saraswati Nagar that a person is lying dead near Prahat Pul, upon which, ASI Jyoti Kumar, Incharge Police Chowki, Saraswati Nagar, reached there. On the spot, Up-Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Saraswati Nagar and other local persons were also present. SDPO, Rohru also reached at the spot. Photography of the spot was done and dead body was minutely inspected.
6.1 The dead body was identified as of one Rahul Kulla, S/o Madan Lal, R/o Bhatwari, P.O. Kaloti, Tehsil Chirgaon, District Shimla, H.P. The uncle of deceased, Anil Kumar and Narender Kumar were also present on the spot. Their statements were recorded. No sign of external injury was found on the dead body. Thereafter, dead body was sent for post-mortem examination to Civil Hospital, Jubbal and after conducting the post-mortem, the dead body was handed over to the family members for performing the last rites.
6.2 During investigation, it was found that deceased Rahul Kulla was addicted to drugs, and without disclosing to his parents, he used to leave the house. From the last three months, he was also stated to be out of house. However, 7-8 days prior to the incident, he is stated to have returned back and stayed there for 3-4 days. Thereafter, he again left the house. Proceedings under Section 194 BNSS were conducted by ASI Jyoti Kumar.
6.3 Family members of deceased Rahul Kulla raised suspicion of his death, upon which, SDPO, Rohru had constituted a Special Investigating Team.
6.4 Mobile phone of deceased Rahul Kulla was found in the broken condition, at the spot, which was taken into possession. Thereafter, service provider was requested to provide the CDR of Rahul Kulla, bearing mobile No. 7807954197. CCTV footage of camera installed at Hatkoti Kenchi, was checked.
6.5 On 5.7.2024, uncle of deceased Rahul Kulla made a complaint before the Police, disclosing therein that they are three brothers. Elder brother Madan Lal (father of deceased Rahul Kulla) is stated to have expired. They are stated to be residing jointly. Deceased Rahul Kulla, during his lifetime, is stated to be driving the vehicle. On 30.6.2024, deceased Rahul Kulla is stated to have left the house, on the pretext that he is going out with his friend in pick-up. On 3.7.2024, they came to know about the death of Rahul Kulla. His body was identified. A syringe was also found in the right hand of Rahul Kulla. On the day, when the complaint was made, the complainant came to know about the fact that on 30.6.2024, his nephew had gone to Dehradun in the pick-up of Aakash (applicant), R/o Village Andhra, alongwith Prince Deshta.
6.6 As per the complainant, on 4.7.2025
The court ruled that bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment before trial, emphasizing that continued detention is unwarranted when the investigation is complete.
The court emphasized that bail should not be denied as a form of punishment, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty.
The presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and bail should not be denied as a form of punishment before trial conclusion.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; completion of investigation and similar treatment of co-accused warrant granting bail with conditions.
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.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, allowing bail when investigation is complete and no prior cases exist.
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.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
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.
The court granted bail to the applicant due to lack of direct evidence against him, emphasizing the importance of individual rights during trial.
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.