IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
Partap Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
This order of mine shall dispose of both these applications, which have been filed by the applicants,under Section 483 of the Code of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’), for releasing them, on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.13 of 2024, dated 12.01.2024 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR, in question’), registered with Police Station Bhuntar, District Kullu, H.P., under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1908’), Sections 32 & 33 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1927’), Section 21 of the Mines & Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1957’) and Sections 379 and 286 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC).
2. The relief of bail has been sought on the ground that the applicants, in this case, have been arrested on 11.11.2024 and from that day, they are in judicial custody. The story of the police is stated to be imaginary and baseless, as, there is no link of the applicants in the commission of the alleged crime.
3. According to the appl
Bail can be granted during trial if applicants are presumed innocent, no other cases exist against them, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
Pre-trial detention should not serve as punishment; applicants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, warranting their release on bail with conditions.
Bail can be granted when applicants are presumed innocent, no other cases exist against them, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
Bail granted despite serious charges as ongoing investigation shows no strong evidence against applicant.
Bail granted when investigation complete, recovery effected, no further detention needed.
The presumption of innocence prevails until trial conclusion, and vague police assertions are insufficient to deny bail.
The court established that custodial interrogation was unnecessary due to the absence of incriminating evidence against the applicants and their clean records.
Application of pre-arrest bail and conditions set therein under relevant statutory provisions.
The court ruled that continued detention is unwarranted when investigation is complete and no prior cases exist against the applicant, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
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.