Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ayush Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. alleged push at bhandara caused fatal head injury amid family dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims false case; state alleges motive and absconding risk. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. bail rule unless grave crime or justice thwarting risk. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. push without knowledge of death not culpable homicide under s.103(1). (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. bail granted with conditions due to bailable additions and weak case. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
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 repor
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....
Bail denied in murder case due to prima facie aggressor role evidenced by eyewitness, CCTV, blood-stained exhibits; criminal antecedents; witness tampering risk from prior enmity; trial delay not out....
The court emphasized that the severity of the crime and potential interference with the investigation justify the denial of bail, aligning individual liberty with societal safety.
Bail denied in heinous POCSO offence involving minor rape due to prima facie case, accused's absconding history risking flight, and no undue trial delay despite charge-sheet and witness examination.
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.
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
