The court emphasized that custodial violence is a serious issue and denied bail due to the applicant's involvement in the alleged crime and previous dismissals of bail applications.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Applicant Lakhbir Singh has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), with a prayer to direct the Police/Investigating Officer of Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No.351 of 2023, dated 27.12.2023, under Sections 330, 331, 354, 294, 509, 506, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’).

2. The relief as claimed in the application has been sought on the ground that the applicant is suffering from anxiety, due to lodging of FIR and his condition is going from bad to worse. In this regard, the applicant has also annexed the prescription slip Annexure P-1 (Colly.).

3. According to the applicant, he has falsely been arrayed as one of the accused and has been arrested by the police, in the present case.

4. As per the applicant, on 14.06.2023, FIR No.172 of 2023 was registered with Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, HP, under Sections 376, 506 and 34 of IPC, against one Vivek Mahajan, in which case also, complainant, in the present case, was the complainant.

5. It is the case of the applicant that at the relevant time, the applicant was posted at Police Station Nalagarh. According to him, during investigation of the said FIR, one complaint was received from Vivek Mahajan against Tanuja Chandola and Suraj Chandola, pursuant to which, FIR No.194 of 2023 dated 23.07.2023, under Sections 387, 389, 416, 506 and 120B of IPC, was registered with Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, HP, against Tanuja Chandola and Suraj Chandola, on the allegations of extortion and honey trap and it was found that many transactions of about Rs.12,00,000/- were made, in the account of Tanuja Chandola.

6. It is the further case of the applicant that during investigation of the said case, it was found that complainants Tanuja Chandola and Suraj Chandola had produced some forged receipts and thereafter, FIR No.285 of 2023 dated 08.10.2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of IPC, was registered with Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, against those two persons, namely Tanuja Chandola and Suraj Chandola. Those complainants are stated to be having links with higher police officials and they were pressurizing the applicant for closing the FIR against them.

7. It is the further case of the applicant that thereafter, complainant Suraj Chandola has approached the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., by way of complaint, upon which, the present case i.e. FIR No.351 of 2023 dated 27.12.2023, under Sections 330, 331, 354, 294, 509, 506, 201 and 34, has been registered.

8. In the said FIR, according to the applicant, there were allegations, levelled against some police officials, regarding custodial violence, during the remand period i.e. from 12.10.2023 to 21.10.2023. During investigation, police asked complainants to give written statement/ complaint, however, complainants sought time after consulting with their lawyer and finally, the statement/complaint was sent through e-mail, upon which, the present FIR has been lodged.

9. It is the further case of the applicant that after registration of the FIR, he had filed application bearing Cr.MP(M) No.1369 of 2024, before this Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 23.08.2024.

10. Highlighting the fact that he has no connection, whatsoever, with the crime, for which, he has been arrested by the police, it is the further case of the applicant that investigation, in the present case, is complete and as such, his custodial interrogation is no longer required by the police.

11. In addition to this, the bail has also been sought on the ground of parity as the co-accused Kalyan Singh has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order dated 05.11.2024, passed in Cr.MP(M) No.2326 of2024.

12. Apart from this, learned counsel appearing for