Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
Kamal Singh alias Tiger – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grievous injuries from ambush attack on victims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioner identified via cctv, eyewitnesses, taxi. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. contradictions alleged; merits for trial evaluation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. trial delay due to stays, not prosecution fault. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 35) |
| 5. strong prima facie evidence of planned assault. (Para 33 , 36 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 6. bail denied; prima facie case established. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 483 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail in case FIR No.239 of 2021, dated 26.08.2021, registered in Police Station Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 302, 307, 323, 325, 326, 201, 147, 148, 149, 440, 354, 354-B, 109 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’), Section 25 of Arms Act and Sections 3 (1)(r), (s), (w) & 3(2)(v-a) of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as SC & ST Act).
2. Status Report stands filed. Record was also made avai
Bail denied in serious assault/murder case as CCTV footage, eye-witness identification of presence and participation with co-accused establish prima facie involvement, despite statement contradiction....
The court ruled that strong evidence existed against the accused for serious crimes, and health concerns and trial delays did not justify bail.
The court ruled that the presence of the petitioner in CCTV footage and witness statements constituted a prima facie case, justifying the denial of bail.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without progress in trials violates the accused's right to liberty and mandates release on bail to avoid indefinite incarceration.
Violation of the fundamental rights of the accused-applicant guaranteed under Article 21 read with Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Point of Law : Common object of unlawful assembly to kill the deceased - minor variance in the statement of maker of first information report should not lead to conclude that first information report....
A conviction under Section 394 IPC requires evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is compromised by significant procedural lapses and inconsistencies in witness statements.
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
