Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
Varun Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
1. Apprehending his arrest, in Case FIR No. 192 of2024 dated 14.12.2024 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 118 (1) and 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ BNS ’), with Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., the applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNS S’).
2. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the I.O/police of Police Station Indora, to release him, on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case/FIR.
3. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated by the police, in the present case.
4. Applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P., however, his application was dismissed, vide order dated27.12.2024.
5. On the basis of above facts, certain undertakings have been given, on behalf of applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case
The presumption of innocence prevails, and prior convictions do not negate eligibility for anticipatory bail; proper considerations include investigation status and the necessity of custodial interro....
The presumption of innocence allows for interim bail confirmation when the applicant cooperates with the investigation and no prior criminal record exists.
The presumption of innocence and completion of investigation justified granting bail, emphasizing that pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
A suspect may be granted bail if there is no substantial evidence of guilt or risks associated with evidence tampering; pre-trial detention is prohibited without significant justification.
The severity of charges under the IPC and Arms Act outweighs the applicant's health concerns, justifying the denial of bail.
The court granted bail to the applicants, emphasizing that continued custody was unnecessary due to completed investigation and similar treatment of co-accused.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; completion of investigation and similar treatment of co-accused warrant granting bail with conditions.
The court emphasized that custodial violence is a serious issue and denied bail due to the applicant's involvement in the alleged crime and previous dismissals of bail applications.
The key legal principle established is that bail may be granted based on the circumstances of false implication and the lengthy trial process.
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
