Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Puran Chand @ Bunty – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. murder fir based on eyewitness beating deceased. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims arrest violation; state cites antecedents. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. bail guided by offence nature, evidence, antecedents. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. arrest grounds communication applies prospectively. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. bail ensures accused attendance at trial. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. antecedents bar bail to avert recidivism. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. murder gravity presumes absconding risk. (Para 22 , 24) |
| 8. self-caused delay denies bail ground. (Para 23) |
| 9. bail denied on cumulative adverse factors. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 86 of 2023, dated 29.07.2023, registered at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short “IPC”).
2. It has been asserted that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the petitioner, which is violative of Article 22 of the Constitution of India; hence, the petitioner is entitled to bail. F.I.R. No. 50 of 2004, dated 04.04.2004 and F.I
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....
Successive bail petitions require material change in circumstances; charge sheet filing insufficient. Criminal antecedents and fleeing investigation justify denial despite procedural claims.
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 bail should be denied due to the petitioner's extensive criminal antecedents and involvement in the crime, emphasizing the need for public safety.
In NDPS case, regular bail granted due to one-year pre-trial custody and trial delay violating Article 21 speedy trial right, despite antecedents; proportionality applied to quantity, State cannot op....
The court emphasized that bail is not an automatic right, especially in drug offenses, considering the applicant's criminal history and the need to protect societal order.
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....
An individual's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 mandates consideration for bail, emphasizing the need to avoid prolonged detention without trial.
In NDPS cases with intermediate contraband quantity, over one-year incarceration and trial delay violate Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail despite antecedents as State cannot oppose on cr....
Bail applications must disclose prior criminal history, with courts assessing the risk of re-offending and societal safety when considering bail requests.
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
