1 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1245 of 2025 a/w Cr.MP(M) Nos. 1246 to 1248 & 1258 of 2025 Reserved on:- 06.06.2025 Date of Decision: 16.06.2025 Cr.MP(M) No.1245 of 2025 Shashi Paul Sharma …Applicant Versus State of H.P.& Anr …..Respondents ________________________________________________ Cr.MP(M) No.1246 of 2025 Bimla Devi …Applicant Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ..Respondents ________________________________________________ Cr.MP(M) No.1247 of 2025 Parul Sharma …Applicant Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ..Respondents ________________________________________________ Cr.MP(M) No.1248 of 2025 Swati Sharma …Applicant Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ..Respondents ________________________________________________ Cr.MP(M) No.1258 of 2025 Moti Lal Sharma …Applicant Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ..Respondents 2 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant(s) : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Chauhan Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1, in all the applications. Mr. Arun Sehgal, Advocate, for respondent No.2, in all the applications. Virender Singh, Judge The above-titled bail applications are being disposed of by this common order, as, all the bail applications have been filed, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’) by the applicants, after surrendering themselves to the custody of this Court on 28.05.2025. 2. By way of these applications, the applicants have sought the indulgence of this Court to release them on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case arising out of FIR No.82 of 2025, dated 27.05.2025 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 351 (2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (hereinafter referred to as the BNS) 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 3 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) and Section 3(1)(f) of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter referred as to SC&ST Act), with Police Station Boileauganj, District Shimla, H.P. 3. By moving separate applications, the applicants have surrendered themselves to the custody of this Court and sought the relief of bail on the ground that they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in this case, just to harass and humiliate them. 4. According to them, they are law abiding citizens and have nothing to do with the offences, for which, they have been accused of. 5. It is the further case that the dispute between them and complainant is purely of civil nature regarding the proprietary rights and land use. The applicants have also asserted that they are permanent residents of addresses, as mentioned, in the applications and ready to abide by any conditions, to be imposed by this Court, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 6. On the basis of the above facts, applicants have given certain undertakings, for which, they are ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 4 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) 7. On the basis of the above facts, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, has prayed that the applicants may kindly be released on bail. 8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 27.05.2025 complainant Smt. Shankri Devi wife of Kapoor Chand moved a complaint, disclosing therein, that she is resident of the address, as mentioned, in the complaint, and belongs to Schedule Caste. Due to their occupation, her husband, son and daughter-in-law remain out of their house and use to come late in the evening. Her husband Kapoor Chand had sold the land to (applicant) Shashi Pal for raising construction of his house. The demarcation of the said land was obtained on 26.04.2025. According to her, in addition to the land, sold by her husband to Shashi Pal, he in connivance with the revenue officials, had encroached upon more land. 9. According to her, she is from poor background and earning their livelihood by working as labourer. She has also alleged that Shashi Pal, when purchased land from her husband, then after serving the liquor to him, got transferred the land. Even, at the time of demarcation, objections were raised about the fact that the said land has not been sold by them. 5 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) Thereafter, Shashi Pal, his wife, daughter and son came to the complainant and admitted that the portion of the land has wrongly been shown in favour of Shashi Pal and also assured that they will vacate their possession. On 26.05.2025, complainant had engaged labour to work in her field, then, applicant-Swati, daughter of Shashi Pal came there and directed the labour to stop the work and claimed that she will raise her house over there. 10. According to the applicants, applicants, Shashi Pal, his wife, son Moti, daughter Swati and husband of Swati used to threaten them that they will encroach upon whole land and they will finish them. 11. On the basis of the above facts, she has prayed that action be taken against accused persons. As such, FIR in question has been registered. 12. Thereafter, the investigation of the present case was entrusted to Dy.SP City. On 30.05.2025, the requisite correspondences were made to District Welfare Officer to obtain Caste certificate of the complainant. The spot was visited on 02.06.2025. The relevant documents were taken into possession. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 180 of BNSS. 6 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) 13. As per the documents, so collected, the husband of complainant Shri Kapoor Chand had sold about 16.5 biswas of land in the years 2015, 2019 and 2021, upon which, the accused persons (applicants) have raised three storeyed building. The dispute, as per the status report, is that the complainant is alleging that the accused party had forcibly occupied portion of their land, which is being claimed by the complainant. 14. It is the further case of the police that since, both the parties are claiming their possession over the land in dispute, as such, on the basis of the documents, so furnished, demarcation will be got conducted. 15. In this case, complainant has also filed the objections, in which, prayer for bail has been opposed merely on the ground that in case, the applicants are released on bail, there is every likelihood of extending a lot of political influence on the prosecution witnesses and the investigating agency so that the investigation may not be conducted in a fair manner. 16. Reiterating the stand, as taken in the complaint, it is the case of the complainant that their land was grabbed by the applicants, in collusion with the revenue staff. It is also her case that the land, upon which, the applicants intend to raise 7 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) construction was never sold by the complainant and her husband. 17. Considering the rival contentions, this Court is of the view that the role attributed to the applicants, would be proved, during the trial and the applicants have already been released on interim bail by this Court on 28.05.2025 and 29.05.2025. There is nothing on record to justify at this stage, as to whether, the custodial interrogation of the applicants are required in this case. 18. The applicants are permanent resident of Shimla, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case the interim orders are made absolute, they may not be available for the trial. 19. So far as the stand of the State that the investigation in the present case is underway is concerned, this Court is of the view that the said fact is too short to conclude, at this stage, as to how the custody of the applicants is required for demarcation. Even otherwise, the applicants can be directed to abide by the conditions, to be imposed by this Court, in case, the interim orders are made absolute. 20. Except from the present case, no other case is stated to have been registered against the applicants. As such, this Court is of the view that dismissal of the present applications 8 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) would be nothing, but the pre-trial punishment, which is prohibited under the law. 21. Consequently, interim orders, dated 28.05.2025 & 29.05.2025 are made absolute and the applicants are ordered to be released on bail, in case FIR No.82 of 2025, dated 27.05.2025, registered under Sections 351 (2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3(1)(f) of SC & ST Act, with Police Station Boileauganj, District Shimla, H.P., subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each, with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. 22. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) The applicants shall appear before the IO, as and when, directed by the IO to do so and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing the appropriate applications; b) That the applicants will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court; c) That the applicants will not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and 9 ( 2025:HHC:18263 ) d) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever. 23. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail applications. 24. The applicants are directed to move regular bail applications, when charge-sheet will be filed in the competent Court of law. 25. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate applications, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 26. Copy of this order be placed in the connected case files i.e. Cr.MPs(M) No.1246 to 1248 & 1258 of 2025. (Virender Singh) Judge June 16, 2025 (subhash)