Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ayush Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 02 of 2026, dated 05.01.2026, registered at Police Station Sainj, District Kullu, H.P, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 103 (1), 115 (2) and 117(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the informant Rajesh Sharma had attended a Bhandara in the Kutiya of Chetan Giri Baba on 04.01.2026. Ayush @ Vishisht Giri Baba (the petitioner) pushed the informant, who fell and sustained injuries to his head. The victim was taken to AIIMS Bilaspur, where he died on 10.01.2026. The allegations against the petitioner are false. As per the report of the post-mortem examination, the death was caused by the head injury and the complications consequent upon blunt force impact. The allegations, even if accepted to be correct, do not constitute the commission of an offence punishable under Section 103 (1) of the BNS. The prosecution asserted that there was a dispute between the petitioner’s grandmother, Tara Devi and the Sainj Valley Taxi Union. The petitioner has no concern with any dispute, as he has renounced the
Pushing a person causing fall and death from head injury does not prima facie constitute offence under Section 103(1) without attributable knowledge of likely death; bail granted as added sections ba....
In serious charges like murder, bail cannot be granted based on trial delays; the nature of the offence dictates the court's discretion over bail.
The court affirmed that in serious offenses, circumstantial evidence and severity of potential punishment must prevail in bail considerations, denying the petitioner's release amid serious accusation....
The court ruled that severity of the charges and substantial evidence against the petitioner justified denial of bail, emphasizing the need to safeguard the judicial process. Evidence indicated likel....
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances; absence of such change upholds previous bail rejections.
Bail denied in attempt to murder via hammer blow to head causing fracture; gravity of offence, severe punishment (life imprisonment), and witness tampering risk paramount despite no blood on weapon.
The court ruled that mere presence at the crime scene is insufficient for conviction, and the petitioner is entitled to bail based on parity with co-accused granted bail.
In sexual offence bail applications involving minors, DNA evidence excluding accused paternity, combined with prolonged detention, recorded victim testimony, and conditional safeguards against tamper....
In double murder cases punishable by death, bail denied where prima facie circumstantial evidence establishes involvement, despite trial delay, emphasizing gravity of offence and punishment severity.
The court emphasized that bail should not be denied without substantial evidence of interference with justice, allowing conditions to safeguard the 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
