Court cites prolonged detention, lack of evidence for custody necessity, and constitutional liberty as grounds for bail
In a significant ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has granted bail to Dr. Abdul Majeed Bhat, a doctor accused of attempting to commit rape, under Sections 62 and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The decision was delivered by Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani on May 14, 2026, following a detailed consideration of the circumstances surrounding the case.
The petitioner, Dr. Bhat, was accused of attempting to rape a patient who visited the Primary Health Centre in Gurwaith, Budgam, where he was on duty. The complainant alleged that during a medical examination, the doctor acted inappropriately, leading her to file a complaint, resulting in Dr. Bhat’s arrest on January 14, 2026.
The High Court's decision to grant bail was based on several factors, including the absence of compelling reasons for continued detention, the constitutional right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The court acknowledged that while the allegations were serious, they did not warrant pre-trial punishment through prolonged incarceration.
Justice Wani emphasized that bail should be the norm and its denial an exception in non-bailable offences that do not involve death or life imprisonment sentences. The court considered Dr. Bhat's social standing and professional status, concluding that he was unlikely to misuse the bail or interfere with the judicial process.
The court imposed specific conditions on Dr. Bhat's bail to ensure his attendance at trial and prevent any potential tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. These conditions include restrictions on leaving the country, repeating any criminal acts, and confronting the complainant.
The High Court's judgment reflects a balanced approach to upholding individual liberty while ensuring the integrity of the judicial process. The court also highlighted the importance of judicial discretion in bail matters, reiterating that the denial of bail should not be used as a punitive measure before conviction.
This case underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding constitutional rights and ensuring that pre-trial detention does not become a form of punishment. The trial in the case continues, with the court clarifying that the bail order should not be construed as prejudging the merits of the case.
Bottom line:-
Bail granted to a doctor accused of attempting to commit rape under Sections 62/64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, considering his continued detention, lack of compelling need for custody, and constitutional guarantee of liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 62, 64, 480 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Sections 183, 483, 491, 492 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
