KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this bail petition filed under Sec. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in FIR No.65 of 2019, dtd. 26/2/2019, registered under Ss. 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that a statement of one Sh. Tek Singh (complainant) was recorded under Sec. 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Police Station Paonta Sahib to the effect that on 26/2/2019 at around 2:30 A.M., while he was going towards his home after his duty hours, one person allegedly joined him on the pretext that he was going in the same direction as the complainant. After walking for some distance, the said person, who was accompanying the complainant, who incidentally happens to be the petitioner, discovered some blood on the road, this raised suspicion in their mind. They walked further downside and found a vehicle bearing registration No.HR20-AE-4546 in an accidental condition, in which, a person was lying in an injured condition. The complainant called for an ambulance and after some time, when the ambulance reached at the spot and the medical personnel checked the injured person, he was found to be dead. This resulted in the lodging of the FIR i.e. FIR No.65 of 2019, dtd. 26/2/2019, under Ss. 279 and 304A of the IPC. The dead body was taken into custody. One passbook in the name of Krishan Kumar was recovered from the vehicle. As per the prosecution, after the incidence, the petitioner made a call to Som Dutt and thereafter Som Dutt alongwith Yudhister, brother of the petitioner reached Poanta Sahib and identified that the dead body was not found to be of Krishan Kumar, that is the person, whose bank passbook was recovered from the accidental vehicle. Thus, the dead body could not be identified. After the conduct of the post mortem, a case was registered under Sec. 302 of the IPC on the basis of the opinion of the doctors. The petitioner was arrested on 2/7/2019 on the basis of CDR and mobile location and since then, he is in custody, now facing trial under Ss. 302 and 201 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner besides being an innocent person and having been unnecessarily dragged in the case, otherwise is entitled for the grant of bail for the reason that it has been more than 5 years since the petitioner was arrested and as the pace at which the trial is being conducted does not suggests that the same is likely to be completed within some reasonable time, therefore, the petition be allowed by ordering the release of the petitioner on bail.

(3.) The petition is resisted by the State inter alia on the grounds that the crime committed by the accused is both grave and heinous. He hails from the State of Haryana and if released on bail, there is each and every possibility that he may jump the bail and, thus, frustrate the course of trial and as the petitioner is involved in the commission of a grave and heinous offence, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.