IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 1056 of 2025 Date of Decision : 08.05.2025 Vikesh Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For respondent/State : Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. It appears that the present petitioner had approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 15411 of 2024, titled Vikesh Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and the Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to order that it was not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 petitioner. Therefore, in these circumstances, no case for interim bail is made out. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to withdraw the present petition and to file an appropriate application before the learned Trial Court after surrendering. Prayer allowed. 4. In view of the above, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file an appropriate application before the learned Trial Court after surrendering, which shall be considered by the learned Trial Court, as expeditiously as possible. 5. The pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 8th May, 2025 (Chander)