Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Vijay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking pre-arrest bail. It has been asserted that FIR No. 7/2025 dated 01.02.2025 was registered against the petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 64, 324(4), 351(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) registered at Police Station Panchrukhi, District Kangra, H.P. As per the prosecution, the accused had entered into sexual relationship with the victim with a false promise to marry her. The victim had earlier made a complaint against the petitioner. FIR No.67 of 2021, dated 30.01.2021, was registered in Police Station Bharwana, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 354A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, which was withdrawn by the victim. The FIR was quashed vide order dated 17.11.2021 passed in Cr.MP(M) No. 560 of 2021. The victim swore an affidavit asserting that she was residing in a live-in relationship with the petitioner. The petitioner and the victim have a son aged 3 years out of this relationship. The victim was aware of the marital status of the petitioner. The petitioner is innocent, and he has not committed a
Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional circumstances, particularly in serious offences like rape, where misrepresentation of marital status is involved.
The court emphasized that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, requiring exceptional circumstances, and must balance individual rights with public interest and the need for effective investi....
Pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is a discretionary measure and should not impede a fair investigation, particularly in serious charges like rape where duress may negate consent.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 requires consideration of the nature of the offence, potential for influencing investigation, and discretion of the court.
The court ruled that consensual relationships turning sour do not justify rape allegations or automatic custodial interrogation, emphasizing the need for substantial evidence before arrest.
Pre-arrest bail may be denied due to specific overt acts presented against the accused, highlighting the seriousness of the charges and potential for reoffending.
A promise of marriage does not constitute rape if the relationship was consensual and there is no evidence of a false promise from the beginning.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted based on the accused's community ties and the nature of the allegations, not solely on the seriousness of the charges.
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
