Whether approved for reporting?¹Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

For the Petitioner : Mr. P.P.Chauhan, Ms. Shikha Rajta & Ms. Urvashi Rajta, Advocates.

For the Respondent : Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhanh & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General.

ASI Maheshwar Parsad, PS i Nalagarh, District Solan, HPH present in person along with record.

Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral) :

Sequel to order dated 20.04.2026, whereby petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on interim bail in FIR No.0278 dated 01.10.2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Nalagarh, District Baddi, H.P., respondent-State has filed status report prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency and ASI Bharat Bhushan has come present with record.

t2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that pursuant to order dated 20.04.2026, bail petitioner has already joined the investigation and she is fully co-operating with the ihnvestigating agency. Mr. Kahol further contends that at thisgstage nothing is required to be recovered from the bail ipetitioner and as such, her custodial interrogation is not required and she can be ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to the condition that she shall make herself available for investigation and trial, as and when called by the Investigating Agency.

3. In view of the aforesaid fair submissions having been made by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason for custodial interrogation of the bail petitioner and as such, she deserves to be enlarged on bail.

4. By now it is twell settled that freedom of an individual is of utmost importance and cannot be curtailed for indefinite period. Till the time guilt of accused is not proved, in accordance with law, he is deemed to be innocent. In the case at hand, the guilt, if any, of the bail petitioner is yet tobhe proved, in accordance with law.

g5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal iNo.227/2018, Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr decided on 6.2.2018 has categorically held that freedom of an individual is of utmost importance and same cannot be curtailed merely on the basis of suspicion. Hon’ble Apex Court has further held that till the time guilt of accused is not proved, in accordance with law, he is deemed to be innocent.

The relevant paras No.2 to 5 of the judgment are reproducedas under:-

2. A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocen ce, meaning thereby that a person is believed to bef innocent until found guilty. However, there aroe instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another mattter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basicCprinciples appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society.

3. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large number of decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the facts and in the circumstances of a case.

4. While so introspecting, among the factors that need to be considered is whether the accused was arrested during investigat