MOHAN LAL
Mohinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Applicants presently lodged in District Jail Udhampur for the last almost two (2) years in case FIR No. 19/2021 registered with Police Station Basantgarh (Udhampur) for commission of offences punishable under sections 376-D/342/34 IPC have claimed bail on the grounds, that after conclusion of the investigation a formal chargesheet has been filed against them which is pending trial in the Court of Principal Sessions Judge Udhampur wherein formal charges have been framed against the applicants/accused, and out of 17 witnesses listed in the challan almost four (4) witnesses including the prosecutrix have been examined. It is averred, that PW-1 (prosecutrix) on 12.04.2022 has been examined by the trial court and she in her evidence has never supported the prosecution story and has not tendered any incriminating evidence against the applicants/accused, and even has not identified them in the Court. It is moreso averred, that applicants/accused are innocent, peace loving citizens of the Country and have committed no offence, otherwise also the offences charged against the applicants/accused are not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty, presumption of innocence
The court emphasized that the accused should not be detained by way of punishment, and refusing bail would amount to punishing the accused without trial. The right to liberty and a speedy trial are f....
The main legal point established is that bail is the rule and jail is an exception, and the accused should not be detained as a form of punishment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the presumption of innocence, grant of bail as a general rule, and deprivation of personal liberty must be considered as punishment. The court....
The approach of the court in granting bail should not be to detain the accused by way of punishment, and material witnesses cannot be easily influenced by the accused.
The legal position established that the accused should not be detained by way of punishment, and the material witnesses cannot be expected to be won over by the accused.
The presumption of innocence, the right to liberty, and the need to secure the presence of the accused for trial were central legal principles established in the judgment.
The accused should not be detained by way of punishment, but his presence should be readily available for trial.
The court highlighted the presumption of innocence, the right to personal liberty, and the discretionary nature of bail in balancing the interests of the accused and the society.
The gravity and seriousness of the offence are crucial factors in deciding bail applications.
The court established that the denial of bail should not serve as a pre-trial punishment and emphasized the importance of the accused's right to liberty and a speedy trial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.