Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Manjeet Singh Nadda – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 58 of 2025, dated 14.03.2025, registered at Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 109, 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 of Arms Act.
2. It has been asserted that the informant and 3-4 people were sitting in the courtyard on 14.03.20.25. Four people entered the courtyard at around 3 PM. Two of them pulled out pistols and started firing at the informant and other persons. The informant and other persons shouted for help and ran away from the spot. The assailants also ran away. Bambar Thakur, the informant and his PSO sustained injuries. They were taken to the hospital. The matter was reported to the police. The police registered the FIR and arrested the petitioner on 15.03.2025. The petitioner was not present at the crime scene, and he has no connection with the commission of the crime. The petitioner’s mobile phone was seized. There was no call between the petitioner and the co-accused. The petitioner was subjected to custodial torture on the night of 07.08.2025.
The court ruled that bail should be denied due to the petitioner's extensive criminal antecedents and involvement in the crime, emphasizing the need for public safety.
Successive bail petitions require material change in circumstances; charge sheet filing insufficient. Criminal antecedents and fleeing investigation justify denial despite procedural claims.
Confessional statements of co-accused to police inadmissible under CrPC Section 162 and Evidence Act Section 25; insufficient alone to deny bail without other incriminating material, per bail princip....
Bail denied in NDPS case with intermediate heroin quantity due to prima facie conscious possession in own house, rejection of parity over differing co-accused roles, and criminal antecedents indicati....
Bail denied in murder case due to criminal antecedents including proclaimed offender status and conviction, eyewitness assault evidence, blood findings, offence gravity, and absconding risk; arrest g....
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....
Bail denied in NDPS case with intermediate contraband quantity due to accused's criminal antecedents, prior similar offences, repetition risk, and societal drug menace, rejecting parity with co-accus....
Bail denied in NDPS case for intermediate contraband quantity due to prior case suppression, criminal antecedents, red-handed recovery, and repetition risk, emphasizing societal protection over liber....
The Court ruled that bail cannot be granted in drug-related offenses without careful consideration of the accused's antecedents, emphasizing public safety.
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
