Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
S – 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 F.I.R. No. 57 of 2024, dated 07.10.2024, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 49 and 64 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short ‘BNS’) registered with Police Station Khudiyan, District Kangra, H.P. The police have filed the charge sheet before the Court on 20.02.2025 and the matter was listed on 15.03.2025 for office report. The petitioner has no concern with the commission of the crime. The petitioner is in custody for five months. No fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. 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 the victim (name being withheld to protect her identity) is the wife of the petitioner. She had gone to the rented room of the petitioner in village Theel on 05.10.2024. Suresh Chand, a friend of her husband was also residing in the same room. The petitioner told the victim that Suresh ties the sacred thread. Suresh told the petiti
The court emphasized that bail should be denied in serious offences like abetting rape, considering the gravity of the crime and potential influence on the victim.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted based on the nature of accusations, the gravity of the offence, and the risk of witness tampering, while ensuring conditions facilitate justice.
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.
The court emphasized that in serious criminal cases, particularly involving sexual offences, the gravity of the allegations and potential witness tampering are critical factors in bail considerations....
The court emphasized that bail in heinous offences against minors is not granted lightly, considering the nature of the crime and the right to a speedy trial.
The court emphasized that bail should not be denied without substantial evidence of interference with justice, allowing conditions to safeguard the process.
The court emphasized that the heinous nature of the crime and the evidence against the petitioner justified the denial of bail, despite claims of trial delays.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when there is insufficient evidence to substantiate serious allegations, and the accused's rights must be balanced with the need for justice.
Discrepancies in a victim's statements do not justify bail in serious offences like rape once the trial has commenced, reflecting the need to ensure trial integrity.
The court emphasized that serious allegations, especially involving children, require careful consideration of evidence and potential risks before granting bail.
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
