Court reaffirms that bail is warranted where material shows natural cause of death and no evidence of violence; binding on trial courts as per High Court’s discretionary exercise of bail jurisprudence.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | BA1/1451/2025 of NISAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND |
| CNR | UKHC010124302025 |
| Date of Registration | 11-08-2025 |
| Decision Date | 18-08-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | GRANTED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ PUROHIT |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Bench | Single-Judge |
| Type of Law | Criminal Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether bail should be granted when the post-mortem report shows no anti-mortem injuries and death due to cardiac arrest in a culpable homicide case |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that at the interlocutory stage bail is the rule and incarceration the exception. Examination of the FIR and post-mortem report revealed no anti-mortem injuries and that death resulted from coronary spasm. In absence of any material linking the applicant to violence, and given the applicant’s denial, continuation of detention would be unjust. The seriousness of the charge does not preclude bail where preliminary material fails to establish involvement. Accordingly, the applicant merits release on furnishing personal bond and sureties. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | The Court considered the contents of the FIR and the post-mortem report showing natural cause of death, emphasizing that prima facie material must justify continued custody. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The applicant was arrested under Sections 105, 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023, for alleged culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The FIR records a commotion during boarding of a bus in which the deceased, aged 40, collapsed and died. Post-mortem disclosed no ante-mortem injuries, attributing death to coronary spasm. The applicant denies any role in the incident. |
| Citations | 2025:UHC:7221 |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Emphasizes that absence of anti-mortem injuries and natural cause of death in a post-mortem report can tip the balance in favour of bail in serious homicide cases.
- Reinforces that the gravity of charges alone cannot outweigh prima facie material showing non-involvement.
- Affirms that bail is the rule and jail the exception, even in alleged homicidal incidents, where preliminary evidence is deficient.
- Guides practitioners to foreground forensic findings in bail petitions for violent offences.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Identification of offences under B.N.S. Act, 2023 (Sections 105, 190, 191(2), 191(3)) for alleged culpable homicide.
- Perusal of FIR revealing an altercation and the subsequent death of the 40-year-old deceased during a bus commotion.
- Examination of post-mortem report showing absence of ante-mortem injuries and cause of death as cardiac arrest due to coronary spasm.
- Applicant’s denial of involvement and lack of material implicating him in violence.
- Invocation of the principle that at the bail stage, where material is insufficient to show prima facie guilt, liberty should not be curtailed; therefore, bail must be granted on furnishing bonds and sureties.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Applicant’s Counsel)
- The post-mortem report shows no anti-mortem injuries; death was due to coronary spasm.
- The applicant had no role in the deceased’s demise and has been falsely implicated.
Respondent (State Counsel)
- The charges under the B.N.S. Act are serious and involve culpable homicide.
Factual Background
The applicant stands accused under FIR No. 0261/2025 for alleged culpable homicide not amounting to murder under the B.N.S. Act, 2023, following a commotion during boarding of a wedding party bus in Haridwar. The deceased, aged 40, collapsed and died; post-mortem examination revealed no external injuries and cited coronary spasm as the cause of death. The applicant maintains innocence and seeks bail on the strength of the forensic report.
Statutory Analysis
- Sections 105, 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023, under which the applicant is charged, pertain to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, framing the scope of offences considered in bail adjudication.
Citations
- High Court of Uttarakhand: 2025:UHC:7221
- CNR: UKHC010124302025