High Court denies bail to murder accused

Srinagar, Oct 13: When there is prima facie material suggesting involvement of an accused in a serious offence, bail may be denied to prevent the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh said on Monday.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal said this while denying bail to one Tarun Sharma, a resident of Udhampur.

He had petitioned the court for bail.

Sharma has been accused of murdering Amit Gupta of Shakti Nagar, Udhampur, on October 20, 2022. According to the prosecution, his motive behind the offence stemmed from a financial dispute between him and the deceased.

Gupta had allegedly paid an amount of Rs 10,000 to Rs 12,000 to Sharma, who, being unable to return the money, committed the crime out of frustration and to escape liability.

“It is a settled position that when there is prima facie material suggesting the involvement of the accused in a serious offence, bail may be denied to prevent the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses,” the bench said. “In this case, several key witnesses remain to be examined. The trial is ongoing, and releasing the petitioner on bail at this critical stage may prejudice the proceedings,” it said.

The court concluded that the order passed by the Session Judge denying bail was not unlawful, irrational or a failure to apply judicial reasoning.

While Sharma had raised the issue of delay in the trial, the court said that “the same cannot be viewed in isolation.”

“No such delay exists, as evidenced by the fact that 18 out of 29 prosecution witnesses have already been examined, clearly indicating that the trial is progressing in a diligent and timely manner,” the court said. It said that the prosecution had demonstrated sustained efforts to conclude the trial.

While the court noted that, given the seriousness of the offences involved, the stage of the trial assumes great significance in the bail determination, it said, “The argument of delay is therefore factually and legally unsustainable.”

The court held that granting bail at this stage would not only be premature but may also impede the proper completion of the trial.