Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
Room Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court under Section483 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (in short ‘ BNSS ’) seeking bail in case FIR No. 239 of 2021, dated 26.8.2021, registered in Police Station Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 302 , 307, 323, 325, 326, 201, 147, 148, 149, 440, 354, 354-B, 109 and 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short ‘IPC’), Section 25 of ARMS ACT and Sections 3(1)(r), (s), (w) & 3 (2)(va) of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as SC&ST Act).
2. On behalf of the petitioner, apart from the prayer for enlarging the petitioner on regular bail, prayer for interim bail for5-6 months on health grounds has also been made.
3. Prayer for interim bail has been made in this petition mainly on the grounds of health condition of the petitioner as well as delay in progress of trial for non-appearance/examination of the complainant during past one year, and there is no evidence on record regarding involvement of the petitioner in commission of the offence.
4. Status Report stands filed. Record was also made available.
5. Prosecution case is that on 25.8.2021 a
The court ruled that strong evidence existed against the accused for serious crimes, and health concerns and trial delays did not justify bail.
The court ruled that the presence of the petitioner in CCTV footage and witness statements constituted a prima facie case, justifying the denial of bail.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without progress in trials violates the accused's right to liberty and mandates release on bail to avoid indefinite incarceration.
Gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by court while exercising its discretion.
The court determined the necessity for bail based on the absence of direct allegations against certain petitioners, while evidence of serious involvement warranted denial for another.
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances; absence of such change upholds previous bail rejections.
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
