1 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. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 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 3 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 complete the trial, as far as possible, within a period of one year from the date of taking cognizance of the offence.” 11. As per aforesaid provision of the Act, Special Court is under obligation to complete the trial, as far as possible, within a period of one year from the date of taking cognizance of the offence. 12. In the case at hand, charges were framed on 25.04.2024. The case is still at the stage of recording of evidence. Only 14 out of 36 witnesses have been recorded. The matter is now listed for recording of evidence of 9 more witnesses on on 11.02.2026 and 12.02.2026. 4 13. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. Punishment begins after trial. 14. While deciding an application for bail, Court should refrain from evaluating or undertaking a detailed assessment of evidence, which has the potential to prejudice either the case of the prosecution or the defence, is undesirable. 15. From the status report, so filed, it is evident that the petitioner does not have criminal antecedents. Personal liberty is a precious fundamental right. Liberty is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. 16. 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. As per the status report, bail petitioner is stated to be a resident of Village Chhajwana Ka Khabu, Post Office, Sardhwar, Tehsil Balh, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. In order to ensure his presence at trial stringent conditions can be imposed while granting bail. 17. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status report qua the social circumstances of the petitioner, whereby it can be made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the confidence that the Court may place in him to turn out to take justice at the hands of the Court. 18. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension regarding him fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the trial. In any 5 case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 19. 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. 20. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in 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), 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 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; & 6 (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. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent, District Jail Mandi, H.P., through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 24. In case, the petitioner is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent, District Jail Mandi, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Mandi. The Superintendent, District Jail Mandi, 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. 25. The petition stands accordingly disposed of. 26. A copy of this order be sent to the District Jail Mandi, H.P and the learned trial Court by FASTER. 27. 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 7 the order presented to it, the same may be ascertained from the official website of this Court. (Bipin Chander Negi) December 16, 2025 (KS) Judge KAMLESH SHARMA Digitally signed by KAMLESH SHARMA Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:54 +0000