2025:HHC:25765 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No.803/2025. Date of Decision: 01st August, 2025. Rakesh Kumar .....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: M/s Ajay Sipahiya, Pankaj Chauhan and Tarun Mehta, Advocates. For the Respondent: Mr. Manish Thakur, Dy. Advocate General. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail. The same arises out of FIR No.62 of 2024, dated 14.04.2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 302, 212, 201 and 120(B) of IPC. 2. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status report, copy whereof has also been supplied to learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 3. The brief facts in the case at hand are that on 13.04.2024 information was received at the Police Station Sadar, District Solan, HP, via a wireless message from the Regional Hospital Solan that a woman namely Smt. Rashmi wife of Sh. Ashwani Kumar, resident of Ward No.13, Kaleen, PO Saproon, District Solan, had been brought dead to the hospital 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:25765 by her family members. This information was sent to the Police Chowki Saproon and a team of the police was despatched. 4. The police team on arrival at the Regional Hospital found that the body of the deceased (Rashmi) was lying on a stretcher. She had been brought dead to the hospital. Upon examination marks of abrasions were observed on the right side of the neck of the deceased, a minor injury on the upper lip and blood was oozing from the nose. The body was thereafter kept in the mortuary and the family was informed. 5. On 14.04.2024, the brother and the father of the deceased along with other relatives arrived at the regional hospital soon. After inspecting the body and observing the marks on the neck, brother of the deceased (Aman Kumar) recorded his statement before the SHO, alleging that his sister was murdered by her husband Ashwani Kumar by strangulation. Based on the aforesaid, a FIR was registered. 6. The accused Ashwani Kumar was interrogated and his video statement was recorded. He confessed at the Police Station that he had a physical altercation with his wife at around 6:30-7:00 am, during which he strangled her and left her on the bed before going to his shop. Based on the aforesaid, he was remanded and sent to the police custody. 7. Subsequently, Ashwani Kumar retracted from his confession stating that his father i.e. the present bail petitioner had pressurized him to take the blame. He further stated that it 3 2025:HHC:25765 is the bail petitioner, who had murdered his wife (Rashmi). The aforesaid retraction was induced by an alleged CCTV footage shown to the Ashwani Kumar dated 13.04.2024 pertaining to the early morning hours by the police. The bail petitioner, in the case at hand, was arrested on 20.04.2024. Post conclusion of the investigation, challan, in the case at hand was filed on 09.07.2024. Presently the matter is listed for recording of prosecution evidence. In all there are 26 witnesses, out of which only one witness has been recorded. The matter is now listed for recording of evidence of three witnesses on 01.09.2025. 8. In the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances, it is evident that the case of the prosecution primarily hinges on the retracted confession of Ashwani Kumar i.e. son of the present bail petitioner, wherein he implicates the bail petitioner and the CCTV Footage of 13.04.2024. Ashwani Kumar is also an accused in the case at hand. Based on the statement of a co- accused, the bail petitioner is sought to be implicated. Admissibility of such statements is doubtful in terms of Section 25 of the erstwhile Indian Evidence Act and the Section 162 of the erstwhile Cr.P.C. At best, it can only be utilized to lend assurance to other evidence. 9. Besides the aforesaid, authenticity of the CCTV footage as well as the presence of the bail petitioner at the scene of crime and/or committing the crime is a matter of trial. 4 2025:HHC:25765 Moreover, the motive for commission of the offence by the brother of the deceased has been alleged against Ashwani Kumar and not against the present bail petitioner. Other than the aforesaid, time of death is also a matter of trial. There exists no previous history of domestic violence against the present petitioner qua the deceased. 10. At the time of deciding the bail petition, a detailed discussion of evidence so collected and produced by the prosecution, is to be avoided, as it may cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution or to the case of the accused/applicant. 11. Trial is going to take time for its conclusion. Pre-trial incarceration is not the rule. Further detention of the accused would not serve any fruitful purpose, rather would prove pre- judicial to the rights of the petitioner. 12. Punishment begins after conviction. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person in detention is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. 13. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventive. Right to speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 5 2025:HHC:25765 14. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. 15. No criminal antecedents of the bail petitioner have been highlighted in the status report. No adverse material has been placed on record by the prosecution, wherefrom it may be deduced that the bail petitioner would not turn out for trial. 16. Petitioner is permanent resident of Near Primary School, Kaleen, Ward No.13, PO Saproon, Tehsil and District Solan, HP. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension regarding him fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the trial. In any case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 17. Hence, after going through the material available on record and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. 18. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in FIR No.62 of 2024, dated 14.04.2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 302, 212, 201 and 120(B) of IPC, shall be forthwith released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One lac] with one 6 2025:HHC:25765 local surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. However, this bail order is subject to the following conditions:-. (i) Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; (ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever; (iii) Petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court; (iv) Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the victim and Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer; (v) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, Email, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any; & (vi) It is made clear that in case petitioner is arraigned as an accused, in future, in any FIR, then his bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard. 19. Needless to say that the Investigating Agency shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions are violated by the petitioner. 20. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any observations made therein. 21. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent, District Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P., through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 7 2025:HHC:25765 22. In case, the petitioner is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent, District Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendent, District Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P, is further directed that if the petitioner fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, the said fact be submitted to this Court. 23. The petition stands accordingly disposed of. 24. A copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent, District Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P and the learned trial Court by FASTER. 25. A downloaded copy of this order shall be accepted by the learned Trial Court, while accepting the bail bonds from the petitioner and, in case, said Court intends to ascertain the veracity of the downloaded copy of the order presented to it, the same may be ascertained from the official website of this Court. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 01st August, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat) Digitally signed by VANDNA SHARMA DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA, Phone=d3b84f3143a60e693f007f9c5e0fe88152279 f1d9f450a0255823cfc38862034, PostalCode=171001, S=Himachal Pradesh, SERIALNUMBER=3a417623218f5838c6af79de7dc 1906f731266758b23a4f74fad98f0022165e3, CN=VANDNA SHARMA Reason: I am the author of this document Location: Date: 2025-08-01 17:00:54 VANDNA SHARMA