Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI
Raj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bipin Chander Negi, J.
All these bail petitions arise out of the same FIR, therefore, they are taken up together for consideration.
2. By way of instant petitions, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners are seeking bail in case FIR No.87 of 2024 dated 10.09.2024, registered at Police Station, Manpura, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 126(2), 115(2),117(2), 3(5) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
4. The brief facts giving rise to the present petitions are that the incident, in the case at hand, took place in the night of 10.09.2024 at about 12:20 a.m. The complaint, in the case at hand, was lodged by one Dev Raj, the cousin brother of the victim, i.e., Bhupinder Singh. Bhupinder Singh had been beaten up near Petrol Pump, Bagbanian by the present bail petitioners. As per the prosecution, about eight months prior to the incident, in the case at hand, present victim, i.e., Bhupinder Singh along with his friends had beaten up a friend/associate of the present bail petitioners and as a consequence of the prior incident, there
Personal liberty is a fundamental right, and bail serves to secure attendance at trial, not as a punitive measure.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when necessary, emphasizing the importance of the accused's cooperation and lack of criminal history.
Bail is a right, not a punishment; pre-trial incarceration should be avoided unless necessary, especially when charges are unproven and trial is delayed.
The court granted bail emphasizing personal liberty and the absence of incriminating evidence, while imposing conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent interference.
The court emphasized the distinction between consensual sex and rape, ruling that personal liberty is paramount and should only be curtailed when necessary.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when necessary, and bail should secure attendance at trial without being punitive.
The court emphasized that anticipatory bail should be granted based on the nature of allegations and context, rather than solely on the severity of accusations.
The court granted bail to the applicants, emphasizing that continued custody was unnecessary due to completed investigation and similar treatment of co-accused.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when absolutely necessary, emphasizing the non-punitive nature of 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
