Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in a kidnapping case after nearly two years and nine months of custody. The court emphasized that imprisonment at the trial stage should not be prolonged solely for the purpose of teaching the accused a lesson.

Justice Vikas Mahajan underscored that the severity of the offense is not the sole basis for denying bail. Unless there is a genuine risk of flight, evidence tampering, or witness intimidation, an undertrial who has not been convicted should not have their personal liberty curtailed indefinitely.

The court took note that the charge sheet had already been filed, and there was no need for any recovery from the petitioner, who had been in custody since September 2020.

The bail plea was filed by the accused in a case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including kidnapping, assault, and extortion. The victim had provided a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, alleging that she had been abducted for ransom and subjected to physical abuse. The accused had also confiscated her mobile phone and demanded a ransom of Rs 40 lakh.

Highlighting the progress in the case, the court mentioned that the victim's examination-in-chief had been completed, and the prosecution had cited 23 witnesses. Given the extensive trial proceedings yet to be concluded, the court deemed it unjust to prolong imprisonment solely for the purpose of teaching the accused a lesson. The prosecution's case and the defense's arguments still need to be tested in trial, Justice Mahajan emphasized.

The court further noted that there was no evidence to suggest that the accused had caused any harm to the victim. Even the victim's medical examination report indicated no fresh external injuries. Moreover, the prosecution did not establish that the petitioner was a habitual offender or a hardened criminal likely to flee or engage in similar activities if granted bail.

Consequently, the Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused, subject to certain conditions.

Case Title: Shah Alam v. NCT Delhi