IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No.1998 of 2025

Date of Decision : 16.12.2025

Jitender Kumar @ Jassu

…… Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh

……Respondent

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary and Mr. Panku

Chaudhary, Advocates.

For the respondent : Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional Advocate General.

Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral )

The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483 of

the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, arising out of FIR No.21/2024 dated 09.02.2024, registered at Police Station, Balh, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, for an offence punishable under Sections 363, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

2. Notice of the present bail petition was served upon the minor victim through her natural guardian, in terms of order dated 17.10.2025. However, being aware of the pendency of the present petition, they have

chosen not to appear.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

3. Fresh status report stands filed. The same is taken on record.

Copy whereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the status report.

5. Initially, the missing complaint was filed qua the victim, in the case at hand. Based on the same, a FIR was registered under Section 363 of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code. Post recording of the aforesaid FIR, on the next day, the victim had returned home and it was thereafter that Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 were added. In the FIR dated 09.02.2024, the aforesaid additions were made based on the statement of the victim.

6. Statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure confirmed that the petitioner repeatedly had physical relations with the minor victim in her room. The medical and forensic evidence were collected during investigation to corroborate the sexual assault alleged, in the case at hand.

7. FIR, in the case at hand, was registered on 09.02.2024. The present bail petitioner was arrested on 11.02.2024 and is presently in judicial custody. Post investigation, the Challan was filed and charge, in the case at hand, was framed on 25.04.2024. In all, there are 36 witnesses and out of them 14 have been examined. The victim and her mother’s statements have been recorded. The matter is now listed for recording of 9 more witnesses on 11.02.2026 and 12.02.2026. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it appears that the trial would not be concluding in near future.

8. Speedy trial is one of the facets of right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial is an essential ingredient of “reasonable, fair and just” procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the Accused.

9. In this respect, reference can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in, Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, (2024) 9 SCC 813: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693; Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India, (2018) 17 SCC 291: (2019) 4 SCC (Cri.) 184 : 2018 SCC onLine SC 478; Jagjeet Singh v. Ashish Mishra, (2022) 9 SCC

321: (2022) 3 SCC (Cri) 560: 2022 SCC OnLine SC 453

10. The intent of the speedy trial can also be gathered from the statutory provisions of the POCSO Act, specifically Section 35 (2) thereof.

The same reads as under:-

“35. Period for recording of evidence of child and disposal of case.—

(1) The evidence of the child shall be recorded within a period of thirty days of the Special Court taking cognizance of the offence and reasons for delay, if any, shall be recorded by the Special Court.

(2) The Special Court shall comple