Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail to Police Personnel in POSCO Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent bail application, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Satyen Vaidya, has granted bail to the accused, Mangal Singh, in a case related to child sexual offenses. The judgment was pronounced on 13th June 2023 in Cr.MP(M) No. 1344 of 2023.

The petitioner, Mangal Singh, had sought bail in connection with FIR No. 15 of 2023 registered at Women Police Station, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The allegations against the petitioner stated that on 30th April 2023, he had committed sexual assault and harassment on a male child victim, who was approximately ten years old. The incident involved the petitioner inserting his hand into the child's trouser and using indecent language towards him.

During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Jagdish Thakur, contended that his client was innocent and falsely implicated in the case due to personal vendetta. It was further alleged that the petitioner had been targeted by individuals with whom he had an adverse relationship. On the other hand, the Additional Advocate General, Mr. H. S. Rawat, representing the State, opposed the bail application, highlighting the serious nature of the offense and expressing concerns about the petitioner's potential influence on prosecution witnesses, given his status as a police personnel.

After careful consideration of the arguments and perusal of the record, Justice Satyen Vaidya delivered the judgment. The court observed that while the accusations against the petitioner were grave, they were subject to proof, relying primarily on oral evidence. The court noted that pre-trial incarceration is not the general rule and emphasized that keeping the petitioner in custody until the conclusion of the trial would not serve any fruitful purpose. It was highlighted that the investigation was already complete, with the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) yet to be submitted.

Considering the circumstances, including the petitioner's permanent residency in Deonghat, Post Office Saproon, Tehsil and District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, and the absence of any likelihood of absconding, the court granted bail. To secure his release, the petitioner was required to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, or any other Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class stationed at Solan.

The court imposed several conditions on the petitioner's bail, including mandatory appearance before the trial court on all dates and refraining from any direct or indirect inducement, threat, or promise to anyone acquainted with the facts of the case. It was made clear that a breach of any bail condition would lead to the cancellation of the bail. Additionally, the petitioner was prohibited from leaving India without prior permission from the court.

The court concluded by clarifying that the observations made in the order should not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. It emphasized that the trial court should decide the matter impartially, uninfluenced by any remarks made in the present order.

This judgment by the Himachal Pradesh High Court highlights the delicate balance between the right to bail and the serious nature of offenses under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The court's decision to grant bail in this case reflects its consideration of the specific circumstances and the absence of a reasonable likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice or influencing witnesses.

Date of Decision: 13.06.2023

Mangal Singh vs State of H.P. 

Latest Legal News