Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1596

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Sachin Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr MP (M) No. 2471 of 2025
Decided On : 11-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : N.S. Chandel, Nimish Gupta
For the Respondents: H.S. Rawat, Rohit Sharma, Ranjna Patial

The court reinforced the right to bail and emphasized that pre-trial detention should not serve as punishment when evidence against the accused is insufficient.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Release on bail - The applicant filed for bail during trial for charges of 105, 3(5), 115(2), and 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita arising from a suspicious incident where injuries and a death occurred. The Court found insufficient evidence linking the applicant directly to the crime (Paras 1-25).

(B) Legal Precedent - Pre-trial custody should not act as punishment; hence release is warranted where no specific role is attributed to the applicant, noting the principle of presumption of innocence unless proven guilty (Paras 14-17).

(C) Conditions for bail were stipulated to ensure attendance and compliance (Paras 22-24).

Facts of the case:
The application arises out of an incident at Hotel Nature Valley, involving a scuffle where the hotel's General Manager died, and the applicant was accused but maintained innocence. Various witness statements and CCTV footage conflict with the prosecution’s narrative.

Findings of Court:
The Court concluded no role was definitive enough to justify retaining the applicant in custody, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.

Issues: The main questions included whether the applicant was involved in the alleged crime and if his release could disrupt the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The Judge reinforced the stance that the rejection of bail cannot be punitive and must consider the merits of the accused's claims and lack of strong evidence.

Result: Bail application allowed.

JUDGMENT :

VIRENDER SINGH, J.

1. Applicant-Sachin Kumar has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), seeking his release on bail, during the pendency of trial, arising out of FIR No. 1 of 2025, dated 1st January, 2025, registered under Sections 105, 3 (5), 115 (2) and 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’), with Police Station Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P.

2. According to the applicant, the FIR, in the present case, has been lodged on false allegations, by the police.

3. As per the case of the applicant, the story of the prosecution is shrouded by suspicious circumstances and there is no link evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged incident.

4. It is the case of the applicant that there is nothing on record, much less evidence, to prove the allegations levelled against him..

5. According to the applicant, he is innocent and has falsely been implicated and arrested by the police, in the above noted case, as, he has no concern, whatsoever, with the alleged offence.

6. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar bail applications, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, and learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, however, his applications were dismissed.

7. It is also the case of the applicant that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period.

8. It is the further case of the applicant that even, on the ground of parity, he is entitled to be released on bail, as his co-accused has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order, dated 26.09.2025, passed in Cr MP (M) No. 2090 of 2025.

9. The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

10. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application.

11. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 01.01.2025, Constable Vijay Kumar, who was posted as driver with the Dy.SP, telephonically informed Police Station Dalhousie, about the fact, that near Hotel Nature Valley, Banikhet, two persons, were lying injured and number of persons had gathered there. The said persons allegedly sustained injuries in a scuffle.

11.1. As per the informant, the injured have been taken to Bekunth Bathri Hospital, upon which, ASI Vivek Sharma, along with other police officials, reached at Hotel Nature Valley near Banikhet, where, on the spot, the then, Dy.SP Shri Hemant Thakur, along with other police officials, Inspector SHO Jagveer Singh was also present. Thereafter, on inquiry, employee of the Hotel, Subhash Kumar S/o Prakash Chand, made a statement to the ASI Vivek Sharma, disclosing therein, that he is resident of village Kandi, P/o Dalhei, Tehsil Salooni. From the last three years, he is working as Senior Steward in Hotel Nature Valley, Banikhet.

11.2. On 31.12.2024, a dance and dine event was organized for the guests in Hotel Nature Valley, on the occasion of new year. The arrangement of the function was made in the Banquet Hall of ground floor of the Hotel. On 31.12.2024, the party had started at 9:30 PM. The guests were dancing on the music at about 11:00 PM and the guests had returned back to their rooms, after having their dinner. On the same day i.e. 31.12.2024, General Manager of Hotel Nature Valley, Rajinder Malhotra also apprised the complainant, orally that few staff members will also join the party and requested the complainant to receive them.

11.3. It is the further case of the police that when, the guests have gone back to their rooms, then, the complainant and other staff members had started dancing on the music. At about 1:00 AM (midnight), on 01.01.2025, one po