The fundamental Postulate of the Criminal Jurisprudence is the Presumption of Innocence until Innocent is found Guilty: High Court of Shimla

In criminal jurisprudence, the person is presumed to be innocent, unless and until he is found guilty. This auspicious judgement was passed by the High Court of Shimla in the case of Anita Kumari Versus State of Himachal Pradesh [Cr.MP(M) No. 563 of 2021] by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, judge.

The bail application was filed by petitioner whereby the petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on interim bail in connection with FIR No. 57/2021 dated 21.3.2021 under Sections 376, 420, 506 and 120-B of IPC, registered with Police Station Palampur, HP, respondent-State has placed on record status report prepared on the basis of investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. The present bail petitioner had joined the investigation and as such, her custodial interrogation is not required at this stage. It was stated that State has no objection, in case the petitioner had ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to condition that she shall always make herself available as and when required by the Investigating Agency. The object of the bail was 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, bail is not to be withheld as a punishment.

The learned council referred the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation (2012), Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee and Another (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr in which it was held that, “a fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty.”

The court disposed of the case stating that, “subject to the following conditions: She shall make herself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly 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; She shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; She shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and d. She shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.”

Click here to read the judgement-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *