 Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 10: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu has dismissed the bail application of Chaman Lal, who is facing trial for the alleged murder of Uttam Singh, holding that it is too early to conclude that the prosecution case has weakened and that the unexamined material witnesses may be influenced if the accused is released at this stage.
Justice Shahzad Azeem, in an order reserved on November 25, 2025 and pronounced on December 8, 2025, declined to interfere with the trial court’s decision that had rejected the bail plea on July 2, 2025. The petitioner had approached the High Court under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) after being denied bail by the court of the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu.
The defence argued that the case rests on circumstantial evidence and that 10 prosecution witnesses out of 57 had been examined so far, with several witnesses allegedly not attributing motive or direct culpability to the accused. The petitioner also pointed to the inconclusive FSL findings, asserting that the forensic report did not determine the blood group from stains allegedly recovered from the iron pipe said to be the weapon of offence. The plea further cited long incarceration and claimed false implication.
However, the court observed that the prosecution story alleges that on January 26, 2022, the accused, the deceased, and another person visited the house of a witness to attend a religious congregation. The prosecution version claims that the accused allegedly took the deceased to the backyard on the pretext of urinating and, taking advantage of darkness, struck him with an iron pipe, leading to fatal head injuries. The order notes that the case involves a “last seen” circumstance, with key witnesses having supported the prosecution version that the accused and deceased were seen together proceeding to the backyard and that only the accused returned after some time.
Importantly, the High Court underlined that crucial testimonies are still awaited, including those of witnesses who allegedly noticed blood stains on the accused and were part of the sequence of events after the incident. The court also emphasized that the accused, witnesses and the victim’s family belong to a close-knit social and community setup, raising a reasonable apprehension that the accused could influence or intimidate unexamined star witnesses.
Given the gravity of the offence under Section 302 IPC, the stage of trial, and the potential risk of interference with the judicial process, the court held that no ground for bail is made out at this juncture. The petition was accordingly dismissed, with the clarification that the observations are limited to the bail adjudication and shall not prejudice the merits of the trial. (JNF) |
