Rohit vs. State Of Himachal Pradesh - (High Court of Himachal Pradesh) (06 Nov 2020)

Gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by the Court while exercising its discretion

MANU/HP/1031/2020

Criminal

Bail Petitioner, who is behind the bars since 14.5.2020 in FIR registered under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 504, 506, 201 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) has approached this Court for grant of regular bail. Question involved in present case is whether Petitioner is entitled to bail.

Hon'ble Apex Court as well as present Court have held in a catena of judgments that, till the time guilt of a person is proved in accordance with law, he/she is deemed to be innocent. In the case at hand, guilt, if any, of the bail. Petitioner is yet to be proved in accordance with law by leading cogent and convincing evidence, as such, there appears to be no justification to let the bail petitioner incarcerate in jail for an indefinite period during trial, especially when co-accused in the case stand already enlarged on bail. Moreover, challan in the case stands filed in the competent Court of law and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, who has otherwise already suffered for more than six months.

Apprehension expressed by learned Additional Advocate General that in the event of bail Petitioner being enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice, can be best met by putting him to stringent conditions. Recently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr has held that, freedom of an individual can not be curtailed for indefinite period, especially when his/her guilt is yet to be proved. It has further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment that, a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty.

By now it is well settled that, gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by the court while exercising its discretion. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that, object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused in the trial and the proper test to be applied in the solution of the question whether bail should be granted or refused is whether it is probable that the party will appear to take his trial. Otherwise also, normal rule is of bail and not jail. Apart from above, Court has to keep in mind nature of accusations, nature of evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment, which conviction will entail, character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused involved in that crime.

Bail Petitioner has carved out a case for himself. Consequently, present petition is allowed. Bail petitioner is ordered to be enlarged subject to furnishing bail bonds and subject to conditions. If the petitioner misuses the liberty or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him, the investigating agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail.

Relevant : Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr

Tags : BAIL ENTITLEMENT CONDITIONS