Sohail Khan Vs State of Hp — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sohail Khan Vs State of Hp — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; petitioner ordered released on regular bail subject to furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, and to conditions: (i) not to intimidate witnesses or influence evidence; (ii) attend trial without seeking unnecessary adjournments; (iii) furnish address to Police Station and Court for any absence exceeding seven days; (iv) surrender passport, if any; (v) furnish mobile number and social media contacts and abide by notices via SMS/WhatsApp/social media, intimating changes within five days. Misuse of liberty or violation of conditions entitles the investigating agency to seek cancellation of bail. Observations stated to have no bearing on the merits; copy of order to be sent to Jail Superintendent, Model Central Jail, Nahan and the Trial Court by FASTER.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arrested in FIR No. 145 of 2025 (P.S. Paonta Sahib) for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on the allegation that he supplied the motorcycle used in the incident, is entitled to regular bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Prima facie, the petitioner is liable only as an abettor (for supplying the motorcycle); as he caused no actual injury and his custodial interrogation is not required, his pre-trial detention is not justified.

Ratio / Principle

Statements made to the police officer during investigation are inadmissible in evidence as a substantive piece of evidence under Section 181 BNSS and Section 23 BSA; prima facie, no advantage can be derived from the statements made by the petitioner and the co-accused to the police.

Key takeaways

Mere contact/association with co-accused does not make the petitioner a conspirator; to establish the charge of conspiracy it must be shown that the petitioner and the co-accused met and decided to commit the crime before its commission.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh (Shimla) — Cr. MP(M) No. 1907 of 2025; decided 21.08.2025 by Rakesh Kainthla, Judge; not approved for reporting. Regular bail granted to Sohail Khan, arrested 03.07.2025 in FIR No. 145 of 2025, P.S. Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, for offences under Sections 333, 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 117(2), 351(2) and 61(2) BNS, on the allegation that he provided motorcycle No. HP17C-0390 used by five armed, masked persons who beat the informant's household. Bail parameters adopted from Supreme Court guidance reproduced via Ramratan v. State of M.P. (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3068). Court held: (i) statements made to police during investigation are inadmissible as substantive evidence under Section 181 BNSS and Section 23 BSA (with reference to Section 162 Cr.P.C. and Section 25 Evidence Act, relying on Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel, Surinder Kumar Khanna and Tofan Singh); (ii) mere contact with co-accused does not establish conspiracy — an earlier meeting and joint decision to commit the crime must be proved; (iii) petitioner prima facie liable only as abettor, caused no actual injury, custodial interrogation not required, hence pre-trial detention unjustified. Released on bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety, under witness-protection, attendance, travel-intimation, passport-surrender and contact-disclosure conditions; bail cancellable on misuse. Antecedent FIR No. 190/2023 (P.S. Kala Amb) noted in status report.