Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
Anita Kumari – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
1. Applicant-Anita Kumari, has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNS S ’), with a prayer to direct the Police/Investigating Officer of Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., to release her on bail, in the event of her arrest, in case FIR No.251 of 2024, dated 16.12.2024, registered, under Sections 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNS ’).
2. According to the applicant, she is elected Pradhan of Gram Panchayat, Soyara and she has falsely been implicated, in the present case, at the instance of the complainant.
3. As per the applicant, she belongs to a respectable family and is having deep roots in the society.
4. According to the applicant, she is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.
5. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate, has given certain undertakings on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the Police/Investigating Officer, under Section 482 of the BNSS .
6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer
The presumption of innocence prevails in bail decisions, requiring protection from pre-trial detention unless conviction or severe risk of flight is clear.
Bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment before trial; cooperation with the investigation is essential.
The presumption of innocence applies until proven guilty, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited under law.
The presumption of innocence prohibits pre-trial punishment, and bail may be granted with conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.
The court confirmed interim bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and prohibiting pre-trial punishment, while imposing conditions to ensure the applicant's presence at trial.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited under law; bail cannot be denied without evidence necessitating custodial interrogation.
The court ruled that bail can be granted when specific allegations are lacking and the applicant cooperates with the investigation, emphasizing that pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The court emphasized that bail decisions should consider the applicant's exceptional circumstances and highlight the necessity for fair trial procedures without prejudice to either party.
The court granted bail, ruling that evidence was insufficient to warrant custodial interrogation, and emphasized that such matters should be resolved at trial.
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
