The court articulated that continued custody of the petitioner was unjustified in light of the charges and circumstances, emphasizing the principles of bail.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 18 of 2025 dated 24.01.2025 registered at Police Station Sadar District Chamba, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115(2), 238 and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS ).

2. It has been asserted that the petitioner was falsely implicated. He was arrested on 24.01.2025 and has been in custody since then. The petitioner has not committed the offence alleged against him. As per the prosecution, the informant and Pawan Kumar were returning to their home. An unknown person came with a stick and inflicted a blow on the head of Pawan Kumar. Pawan Kumar fell. He was taken to the hospital. The petitioner is a permanent resident of District Lakhimpur Khiri (UP), and there is no chance of his absconding. He would abide by all the terms and conditions which the Court may impose; hence, the petition.

3. The petitioner is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the informant and Pawan Kumar were walking together on 23.01.2025. When they reached near Pir Panjal at about 6:15 pm, an unknown person came from the opposite side carrying a stick. He enquired from Pawan Kumar as to where he was going. Pawan Kumar said that he was going to the house of his uncle, Kewal Kumar. The unknown person inflicted an injury with the stick on the head of Pawan Kumar. The unknown person ran away from the spot. The police registered the FIR and conducted the investigation. The petitioner was apprehended by the local police. He revealed his name as Gurcharan Singh. He was identified by the informant as the assailant. Pawan Kumar was taken to the hospital, and as per the report, the injuries sustained by him were dangerous to life. The victim had sustained a fracture on the left side of the frontal bone. He had also consumed alcohol, and its quantity was found to be 129.73 mg ± 1.80. The police have filed the charge sheet. The matter is listed for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses on 09.07.2025, 14.07.2025 and 16.07.2025. The trial is yet to commence. The offence is heinous; therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have heard Mr. Karan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State.

5. Mr. Karan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and was falsely implicated. The victim was intoxicated, and the possibility of sustaining the injury by way of a fall cannot be ruled out. The charge sheet has been filed, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody; hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

6. Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioner had caused a grievous injury to the informant’s head, which was dangerous to life. The offence is heinous, and the petitioner is likely to commit the crime in case of his release on bail; therefore, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

7. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

8. The parameters for granting bail were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ajwar v. Waseem (2024) 10 SCC 768 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 974, wherein it was observed at page 783: -

“Relevant parameters for granting bail

26. While considering whether bail ought to be granted in a matter involving a serious crimina