Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
Koushal Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
Union Territory of J&K - Respondent
Bail App. No. 191 of 2021
Decided On : 27-08-2021
BAIL - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the petitioner, a young student accused of abetting suicide, considering his age, educational pursuits, and the lack of past criminal antecedents. The court emphasized that bail is a rule and jail is an exception, and imposed conditions to address the apprehension of the respondent regarding potential threats to the complainant and witnesses.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application after being arrested and held in custody for allegedly abetting suicide. The respondent opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offense and the potential threat to the complainant and witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, a young student, had been in custody for over a year and that the allegations against him, though serious, needed to be proven during the trial. The court emphasized that bail is a rule and jail is an exception, and granted bail considering the petitioner's age, educational pursuits, and lack of past criminal antecedents.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail despite being accused of a serious offense and the potential threat he might pose to the complainant and witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the principle that bail is a rule and jail is an exception, and that the petitioner's age, educational pursuits, and lack of past criminal antecedents warranted granting bail. The court also imposed conditions to address the apprehension of potential threats to the complainant and witnesses.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions including furnishing bail and personal bonds, restrictions on leaving the territorial jurisdiction without permission, and prohibition from contacting or visiting the complainant or witnesses.
JUDGMENT :
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of bail in challan titled UT of J&K Vs. Koushal Kumar arising out of F.I.R bearing No. 63/2020 dated 14.03.2020 under Section 306 IPC registered at Police Station, Samba, after the application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Samba vide order dated 31.05.2021.
2. It is stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and was arrested on 19.08.2020 and ever since then, he is in custody. Further, that the petitioner is young boy of 22 years old and pursuing diploma in Civil Engineering in Government Polytechnic College, Jammu and at present is in 5th Semester.
3. The response stands filed in which besides narrating factual aspects it has been stated that the petitioner is involved in heinous and serious offence and as such, he is not entitled to bail.
4. Mr. Ravinder Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in a case particularly, when inquest proceedings remained pending for nearly six months and thereafter, F.I.R was registered on the basis of the manipulated statements. He further submits that he petitioner is a young boy of 22 years of age and because of his continuous detention in the custody, his educational career is in jeopardy.
5. Per contra, Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, learned GA vehemently submits that the petitioner is guilty of committing heinous offence, so he is not entitled to bail and he further submits that there is every apprehension of threat to the complainant as well as the witnesses.
6. Heard and perused the record.
7. Perusal of record reveals that on 20.09.2019, an information was received from PCR Samba that one girl namely Diksha Chowdhary (Age-19 years), D/o Vinay Kumar Chowdhary, R/o Vijaypur District Samba studying in Government Degree College, Samba has died due to consumption of some poisonous substance and therefore, on the receipt of the said information, the inquest proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were initiated and during enquiry, phone call details of the deceased were obtained and from the statement of witnesses under Section 175 Cr.P.C., it was found that Koushal Kumar S/o Sh. Kuldeep Raj, R/o Chang, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Samba used to harass/disturb the deceased by making phone calls and by sending messages to the deceased and used to compel her for marriage. Two days before 20.09.2019, the petitioner had gone to the house of the deceased and started harassing her and because of this harassment, she consumed poisonous substance on 20.09.2019. It is further evident that after completion of the proceedings, the F.I.R bearing No. 63/2020 under Section 306 IPC was registered and it was found that Koushal Kumar S/o Kuldeep Raj, R/o Chang Tehsil Ramgarh District Samba was regularly harassing the deceased by making phone calls/messages and two days prior to the incident, he had even gone to the house of the deceased due to which deceased consumed poison at her home.
8. From the record, it is evident that the challan has been filed against the petitioner and there are allegations against the petitioner that he used to harass the deceased continuously due to which, she committed suicide and further two days prior to the incident, the petitioner had even visited the residence of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than one year and the completion of the trial may take some time. The allegations against the petitioner are no doubt serious but they are required to be proved during the course of the trial. The presence of the petitioner is required only for trial.
9. Needless to say that the bail is a rule and jail is an exception. The petitioner is a young student of 22 years of age, undergoing diploma in Civil Engineering in Government Polytechnic, College, Jammu and the respondent has not brought anything on record to demonstrate tha
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception, and the court may grant bail considering the accused's personal circumstances and the need to ensure the accused's presence for trial.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when there is insufficient evidence to suggest tampering or flight risk, particularly when continued detention amounts to punishment without trial.
Point of Law : Grant of Bail - Fact that the petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petition....
The court considered the petitioner's custody duration, the need for his presence only for trial, and the lack of criminal antecedents in granting bail and imposed specific conditions to address the ....
Criminal Law - Bail application - Petitioner is behind bars from approximately two months, fact that petitioner is permanent resident of District and neither in a position to tamper with prosecution ....
The completion of investigation, lack of necessity for custodial interrogation, and the petitioner's readiness to abide by bail terms influenced the court's decision in granting bail.
Petitioner in the alleged offence, the bail petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail, as he can tamper with the prosecution evidence and also flee from justice.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the completion of investigation, lack of necessity for the petitioner's custody, and the petitioner's willingness to comply with bail conditions, consi....
The main legal point established is that the decision to grant bail is based on the petitioner's lack of flight risk and inability to tamper with evidence, as well as the completion of investigation ....
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
