Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Govind Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 136 of 2022, dated 27.06.2022, registered at Police Station Bhuntar for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been asserted that the petitioner is innocent, and he was falsely implicated. The petitioner had earlier filed a bail petition bearing Cr.MP(M) No. 2057 of 2023, which was dismissed on 11.12.2023 on the ground that the DNA of the hair recovered from the socks of the petitioner matched with the DNA of the deceased. He filed one more bail petition, which was registered as Cr.MP(M) No. 1452 of 2024, which was also dismissed. The prosecution has examined 20 witnesses out of 42 witnesses cited by the prosecution. The completion of the trial is likely to take some time. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose; hence, the petition.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that deceased Shakuntla Devi was residing alone after the death of her husband. The informant, Shakuntla Devi’s daughter, receiv
Subsequent bail applications require a material change in circumstances; otherwise, they cannot be considered.
The court affirmed that subsequent bail applications require a material change in circumstances post a previous rejection, emphasizing judicial discipline in bail hearings.
Bail applications require a material change in circumstances for reconsideration after a previous denial, ensuring the accused's presence during trial without undue delay.
A subsequent bail application requires a material change in circumstances; the gravity of the offence can preclude bail even after prolonged custody.
Grant of bail under the NDPS Act requires meeting specific twin conditions, which were not satisfied, and mere delay in trial does not justify bail unless supported by substantial change in circumsta....
A material change in circumstances is required for reconsideration of bail applications; otherwise, previous denials remain binding.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial justifies bail, even with prior convictions.
Bail cannot be granted based on discrepancies in witness statements once the trial has commenced; substantial change in circumstances is required for reconsideration.
A subsequent bail application requires a material change in circumstances; mere claims of delay in trial do not suffice if the trial is progressing normally.
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances; absence of such change upholds previous bail rejections.
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
