Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1457

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
Amrik Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP (M) No. 1715 of 2025
Decided On : 14-10-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr Sative Chauhan, Advocate
For the Respondent/State:Mr Lokender Kutlehria Additional Advocate General

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 outweighing societal threat.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 307, 325 & 341 r/w 34 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1988 - Section 3(2)(v) - Bail application in case involving fatal assault with axe and iron weapons - Accused and co-accused prima facie aggressors as per informant statement, corroborated by CCTV footage showing them armed and searching, blood on clothes, spot recoveries - Cross FIR indicates presence and injuries on accused side - One deceased, serious injuries to another - Criminal antecedents; prior enmity motivating attack; apprehension of witness influence and threat to society - Trial commenced, substantial witnesses examined/pending - Bail rejected as personal liberty balanced against societal peace and justice process integrity. (Paras 10, 11, 12, 15, 18)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Bail jurisdiction - Parameters: nature/gravity of offence, prima facie evidence, punishment severity, antecedents, witness tampering risk, repetition likelihood, justice obstruction - No detailed evidence appraisal but prima facie reasons required; contradictions in witness statements not basis for bail post-trial commencement; speedy trial right not absolute where trial progressing. (Paras 8, 19, 20)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner sought regular bail after over two years custody in FIR for offences including murder. Prosecution: Accused group assaulted two persons with axe and iron weapons, causing death of one; prior enmity motive. Cross FIR by accused alleging attack by deceased side. No recoveries from petitioner; blood on clothes; CCTV/CDR secured; 89 witnesses cited, 39 examined.

Findings of Court:
Prima facie accused aggressors; deadly weapons used with intent inference; antecedents and enmity pose witness/society risk; trial expeditious.

Issues: Whether bail grantable despite prima facie complicity via eyewitness/CCTV/recoveries, criminal history, witness safety concerns, and ongoing trial; impact of trial delay/cross FIR/witness contradictions.

Ratio Decidendi: Bail discretion exercised judiciously considering offence nature, prima facie material (eyewitness, corroboration), antecedents indicating repetition/threat potential; liberty restricted by societal order - no bail where aggressor role evident, witness tampering apprehension exists; post-trial contradictions impermissible for bail.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner claims false implication in murder. (Para 1 , 2)
2. prosecution alleges petitioner as aggressor with evidence. (Para 3)
3. parties contend on evidence, delay, offence gravity. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. bail parameters include offence nature, antecedents. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
5. cctv, injuries show petitioner as aggressor. (Para 10)
6. enmity risks witness tampering on bail. (Para 11)
7. criminal antecedents disqualify bail grant. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
8. cited cases distinguished as lesser offences. (Para 17)
9. deadly weapons indicate murder intent under 302 ipc. (Para 18)
10. no bail on trial contradictions or discrepancies. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
11. bail petition dismissed considering all factors. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)

JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 26 of 2023, dated 14.3.2023, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 325 & 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC&ST Act), at Police Station Kot Kehloor, District Bilaspur, H.P.

2. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested based on the informant’s statement. No recoveries were made from the petitioner. According to the prosecution, Sukh Dev, also known as Sonu, was travelling from the village of Behal, carrying an Axe, with Krishan Lal on a motorcycle. Rohit joined them near the Mahabali Tunnel. They crossed a river and attacked four unidentified persons. The attack was initiated by the deceased and Rohit with an Axe and a stick. All the parties were injured in the incident. Sukh Dev @ Sonu succumbed to his injuries, and F.I.R. No.24 of 2023, dated 14.03.2023, was lodged by the petitioner and the other accused, against Rohit and the deceased. Twelve criminal cases were pending against deceased Sukh Dev @ Sonu. No specific role was attributed to the petitioner, and the informant only stated that the accused person wanted to kill the deceased (Sukh Dev @ Sonu). The petitioner is innocent, and he was falsely implicated. He has been in custody since 14.03.2023. The prosecution has cited seventy witnesses, out of whom the statements of only six witnesses have been recorded. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions which the Court may impose. Hence, the present petition.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the informant made a complaint to the police that Rohit was his younger brother, who was working at Max Company as a helper. Rohit and Sukh Dev @ Sonu reported to work on 13.03.2023 at about 7:00 p.m. The informant received a call from his brother Rohit on 13.3.2023 at 10.30 PM that some persons were searching for him (Rohit) and Sonu, and he (Rohit) should be taken away from the spot. The informant went to the spot and saw four persons assaulting Rohit and Sonu with an axe and an iron garari. The assailants were identified as Pradeep, Satnaam alias Sattu, Amrik Singh (the petitioner) and Nand Lal. They inflicted injuries on Rohit and Sonu. The assailants went away after seeing the informant in a Pick-up bearing registration No. HP-69-0822. The informant followed them but could not apprehend them. Sukh Dev alias Sonu died in the incident. Sukh Dev alias Sonu had deposed in a murder case, and the persons had attacked Sonu and Rohit due to this enmity. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. It was found that FIR No. 24/23 was registered at the instance of Satnam Singh, stating that Sonu, Rohit and other persons had attacked Satnam, Amrik Singh and Nand Lal with a kripan. They suffered injuries in the incident. Police recovered material objects from the spot. A blood-stained iron, a blood-stained axe and an iron pipe were recovered during spot inspection. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conduct