SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(HP) 974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA 
Bipin Chander Negi, J.
Suresh Kumar  - Petitioner
Vs.
State of Himachal Pradesh and another - Respondents
Cr. MP(M) No.2749 of 2024
Decided On : 15-01-2025

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary and Mr. Panku Chaudhary, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State.

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.

Headnote:

(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 64 and 69 - Anticipatory bail - The petitioner, aged 23, serving in the Indian Army, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of sexual intercourse under the pretext of marriage with a 24-year-old victim - The court noted the absence of elements of threat or intimidation and emphasized the importance of personal liberty - The petitioner was found to have cooperated with the investigation and had no criminal antecedents. (Paras 1, 8, 9, 15)

(B) Bail - The object of bail is to secure attendance at trial, not punitive - Pre-trial incarceration has grave consequences, affecting the presumed innocent and their families. (Paras 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner and victim met via social media, leading to multiple encounters where sexual intercourse occurred under the pretext of marriage. The victim later filed a complaint after the petitioner ceased communication.

Findings of Court:
The court allowed the bail petition, making interim protection absolute with conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation and attendance at trial.

Issues: The main issues included the nature of consent and the absence of threats or intimidation in the alleged offence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that personal liberty is a fundamental right and should only be curtailed when necessary, emphasizing the importance of the petitioner’s cooperation and lack of criminal history.

Result: Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Bipin Chander Negi, J.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.36 of 2024 dated 30.11.2024, under Sections 64 and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Women Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, complainant, who is present in person and have gone through the record.

3. The victim, in the case at hand, is aged about 24 years old. The bail petitioner is aged about 23 years old. The bail petitioner is serving in the Indian Army and is presently posted at RR Rifles-53 at Rahmo, District Pulwama, Jammu and Kashmir. The victim is gainfully employed at Ghumarwin. The victim and the bail petitioner had acquainted with each other over Instagram somewhere in the month of August, 2023. Their acquaintance over the Instagram led to their meeting each other physically, first at Chandigarh and then at Shimla. Subsequently, in December, 2023, as per the prosecution, the bail petitioner had taken the victim to Dharamshala, where they had stayed at a Hotel, wherein, at the pretext of marriage, the bail petitioner is alleged to have indulged in a sexual intercourse with the victim.

4. Thereafter, in the month of February 2024, the sister of the bail petitioner had spoken telephonically with the victim and had invited the victim to visit their home with an intent of acquainting the family of the bail petitioner with the victim. In August 2024, the bail petitioner had called the victim to Kangra, where they had stayed at a Hotel and on the pretext of marriage, he is alleged to have had sexual intercourse with the victim.

5. After the aforesaid, the bail petitioner had stopped taking calls and had blocked the number of the victim. As a consequence whereof, the victim had complained in the Women Police Station, Ghumarwin in this regard. The Police Station, Ghumarwin had asked the victim to meet Child Development Protection Officer (CDPO) one Smt. Ranjana Sharma. The aforesaid CDPO (Ranjana Sharma) had called the bail petitioner and the parents of the bail petitioner. In front of the CDPO, the matter was orally compromised.

6. After the aforesaid compromise, the bail petitioner in the month of September, 2024 had called the victim to Kangra. The victim had met the bail petitioner at Kangra from where they both had proceeded to Jammu. At Jammu, they had stayed at a Hotel, wherein it is yet again alleged that inter se the bail petitioner and the victim sexual intercourse had taken place.

7. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the investigation, in the case at hand, is complete. The bail petitioner has been participating and cooperating in the investigation. No recovery is to be effected from the bail petitioner.

8. The victim, in the case at hand, is aged about 24 years old. She is an adult with sound mind. The element of perversion in the alleged offence, taking into account the comparative age of the victim and the accused, can prima facie be ruled out. Whether the consent of the victim, in the case at hand, was obtained by the bail petitioner on a misrepresentation is a question to be determined at trial. One cannot loose sight of the fact that the bail petitioner had told his family of his relationship with the victim. At the behest of the bail petitioner, the sister of the bail petitioner had taken the bail petitioner to his parental house to meet and interact with his parents Other than the aforesaid, in the case at hand, there exists no element of threat, intimidation, violence or brutality.

9. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.

10. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is nei

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top