Aqbal Bhatia vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Virender Singh, J

Applicant – Aqbal Bhatia has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.40 of 2025, dated 16.06.2025, registered under Sections 65(2), 64(2)(B), 64(2)(F), and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the POCSO Act’), and Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SCST Act’) with Police Station Kunihar, District Solan, H.P.

According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case.

As per the applicant, investigation, in the present case, is complete and he is in judicial custody for the last more than five months.

It is the further case of the applicant that custody of the applicant has now become illegal, as the learned trial Court has failed to comply with the provisions of Section 35(1) of the POCSO Act and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

To buttress their contentions, learned counsel appearing for the applicant have relied upon the decision of this Court in Cr.MP(M) No.1887 of 2025, titled as Dhananjay Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh.

The applicant has tried his luck by moving similar application before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Solan, District Solan, however, his application was dismissed on 12.09.2025.

Apart from the above, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, have given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.

When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 16.06.2025, Surender Thakur, Pradhan Gram Panchayat Maan, informed the police that in School ‘X’, some teacher has misbeheaved with the girl students and the guardian of the said girls gathered in the school, along with other persons and situation there is tense. As such, he has requested the police to come to the spot.

9.1. Thereafter, ASI Jai Ram, along with other police officials, reached at the School, where the complainant moved a complaint, disclosing therein, that his daughter, the child victim ‘P’, aged about 7 years is studying in 3rd standard, in School ‘X’. On 13.06.2025, during evening hours, she has disclosed that applicant, who is teacher in the said school, used to touch her mouth and also kiss on her neck. He also touched her improperly on her private parts.

9.2. As per the complainant, on 13.06.2025, applicant has done said obscene act with her daughter. Thereafter, the complainant contacted the parents of other victims, namely R, P, B and D, residents of XYZ, who have also disclosed the fact that accused (applicant) is doing such type of obscene acts with them also. She has also alleged that accused threatened the victims not to disclose the act to anyone, otherwise, he will get them rusticated from the school.

On the basis of the above facts, the complainant has prayed that action be taken against the accused.

On the basis of above facts, police registered the FIR and the criminal machinery swung into motion.

During investigation, the complainant along with victims were inquired. Considering the tense situation, the accused (applicant) was taken away from the said place and kept at a safer place.

The victims were medico-legally examined at Civil Hospital Kunihar and they were inquired in the presence of their guardian. Their statements were recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. Accused thereafter was arrested. He was also medico-legally examined.

Thereafter, the victims were produced before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasauli, where their statements under Section 183 of BNSS were got recorded. Birth certificate of the victims were obtained. The physical evidence was sent to FSL Junga, from where, report has been received.

Since, some of the victims were found from the scheduled caste category, as such, provisions of Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of the SCST Act, were added, in this case.

After completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed and the case is now listed for prosecution evidence on 27.03.2026.

Lastly, it has been mentioned in the status report that the applicant, being a teacher, has committed such heinous offences with his students and due to his acts, there is lot of resentment in the area. It has also been mentioned in the status report that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he may coerce the child victims and the witnesses.

On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application.

The applicant, in the present case, was arrested on 16.06.2025 and till date, not even a single witness has been examined by the prosecution. As such, the chances of conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright, as according to the applicant, there are, as many as, 31 prosecution witnesses. Certainly, recording the statements of those 31 witnesses will take sufficient long time.

Moreover, the applicant is presumed to be innocent, until proven guilty, by the competent Court of law and he cannot be kept in judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period.

Even otherwise, the bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law and punishment can only be imposed, after the full fledged trial, by competent Court of law.

Applicant is permanent resident of District Solan, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, the the applicant is released on bail, he may not be available for the trial.

So far as the apprehensions, which have been expressed, by the Police, in the status report, are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail.

Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.

Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of trial arising out of FIR No.40 of 2025, dated 16.06.2025, registered under Sections 65(2), 64(2)(B), 64(2)(F), and 351(2) of the BNS, Section 10 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of the SCST Act, with Police Station Kunihar, District Solan, H.P., on his furnishing personal bonds, in the sum of ₹ 50,000/-, with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:

a) The applicant shall 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 the appropriate application;

b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;

c) The applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and

d) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.

Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken, as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations are confined, only to the disposal of the present bail application.

It is made clear that respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant.

The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software.

In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court.

Record be returned to the quarter concerned.