More than eight years after an eight-year old girl was raped and murdered in Jammu and Kashmir’s Kathua district, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied regular bail to an accused after asserting that the acts alleged to have been committed by him “are of a nature which shocks the collective conscience of the society and judicial conscience of the court”.The accused, then a minor, is alleged to be the “main accused, who played star role in the commission of crime along with other accused”. The Supreme Court in November 2022 had ruled that he must be tried as an adult rather than a juvenile.Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal asserted the petitioner had been attributed principal role in the heinous crime of gang rape and murder of the eight-year-old. Investigation had found him involved in the gruesome murder and rape right from the stage of kidnapping the child till she was done to death in a barbaric manner.“There are reasonable grounds to believe that a prima-facie case is made out against him. Though his exact role would be determined on the basis of evidence which is yet to be led during the course of trial, prima-facie, his involvement in the case is made out,” the Bench ruled.The court added the petitioner had been in custody “for a fairly long period”. But the seriousness of allegations weighed heavily against him. Long custody, by itself, could not entitle him to bail considering the manner in which the crime was committed, the role attributed to him and the quantum of punishment conviction might entail.“The acts alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are of a nature which shocks the collective conscience of the society and judicial conscience of the court. Prayer for regular bail is therefore, declined,” the court observed.Before parting with the case, the Bench asserted the trial had been considerably delayed. “Considering the long period of custody of petitioner, learned trial court is requested to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within a period of one year from today,” Justice Nagpal asserted.The Bench added personal liberty was a cherished constitutional principle embodied in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. “Right to speedy trial too has been recognised as a facet of the right to life under Article 21 of Constitution of India. However, in matters involving serious and gruesome crimes, the courts are required to balance the rights of the victim, those of the society at large and of the accused”.Four convicts in the case have filed an appeal in the matter. The appeal was filed by Parvesh Kumar alias Mannu, Deepak Khajuria alias Deepu, Anand Dutta and Surinder Kumar. While Parvesh Kumar and Deepak Khajuria have challenged the trial Court order slapping sentence of life imprisonment on them, Anand Dutta and Surinder Kumar have challenged five years’ imprisonment sentence awarded to them.Taking up the case, the trial court held six of the seven accused guilty. The verdict came one-and-half-years after the incident.