IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CrMPs(M) No. : 1678 & 1679 of 2025 Reserved on : 24.07.2025 Decided on : 28.07.2025 CrMP(M) No.1678 of 2025 Gagandeep …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent CrMP(M) No.1679 of 2025 Gaurav Kumar …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant(s) : Mr. Abhishek Nagta, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) The above-titled bail applications are being disposed of by a common order, as the applicants in both these applications have filed the above titled bail 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 applications under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), since they are apprehending their arrest, in case FIR No. 73/2025, dated 28.06.2025, registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station Tahliwal, District Una, H.P. 2. The applicants have filed the present applications for passing a direction, in their favour, directing the police/Investigating Officer of police station Tahliwal, District Una, H.P., to release them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in the above-noted FIR. 3. According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in the present case. 4. As per the applicants, there is no prima-facie material against them, nor they are involved in the commission of the alleged offences. 5. It has been averred in the applications that the applicants are having deep roots in the society and in case, the police is able to arrest them, it will cause prejudice to their future. 3 6. The applicants have tried their luck by moving the similar applications before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – 1 Una, however, their applications were dismissed vide order dated 11.07.2025. 7. On the basis of above facts, certain undertakings have been given, on behalf of the applicants, for which, the applicants are ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the police/I.O., in this case. 8. On all these submission, Mr. Abhishek Nagta, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants has prayed that the bail applications may kindly be allowed. 9. When put to notice, the police filed the status report on 16.07.2025, disclosing therein, that on 27.06.2025, from Civil Hospital Haroli, a telephonic information was received in Police Station Tahliwal, about the fact that an injured who had sustained injury in a quarrel had been admitted for treatment and a request was made to send the police, upon which, HC Sodhi Ram No. 68 along with other police officials, reached at Civil Hospital Haroli. 9.1 Thereafter, ASI Surender Kumar, I.O. Police Station Haroli also reached there. He has been apprised that Rajat Kumar, son of Surjeet Singh, resident of Village 4 & Post Office Nangal Kalan, Tehsil Haroli has reached at Civil Hospital Una for his treatment, along with his brother Deep Singh. His MLC was obtained. The Medical Officer declared Rajat Kumar as unfit to make the statement. Thereafter, Medical Officer referred Rajat Kumar for further management to Regional Hospital Una. As per the MLC, the Doctor has mentioned that two injuries were found on the person of Rajat. Injury No. 1 is stated to be sharp, whereas injury No. 2 is stated to be caused with blunt weapon. The Doctor has advised CT Scan and X-ray. 9.2 As per the status report, Rajat Kumar was brought to Hospital by his brother Deep Singh. He was contacted, who has disclosed, that on 27.06.2025, at about 9:30 pm, his brother Rajat (injured) telephonically informed him that he had sustained injury and he is present near his house, upon which, he took his brother to Civil Hospital Haroli on motorcycle for treatment. His brother (Rajat) disclosed him about the quarrel. Except this his brother has not disclosed anything. Rajat had sustained blood stained injuries over his head and arm. 9.3 Next day, the I.O. reached at Regional Hospital Una, where Rajat was found admitted. His MLC No. 231/25 was obtained from Civil Hospital Haroli. At 5 Regional Hospital Una, injured Rajat Kumar made a statement under Section 173 of BNSS, disclosing therein, that on 27.06.2025, during the evening time, he had gone to Tahliwal market on his motorcycle. At about 9:20 pm, when he was coming back to his home on the motorcycle, then at a place known as Nangal Kalan in Ward No. 4, Gagandeep son of Sh. Sagli Ram stopped him on the way and started abusing him. He has also threatened him that he will not spare him today. Thereafter, applicant Gagandeep had inflicted the Khanda (Sikh Religious Symbol) blow on the head. The complainant tried to put his motorcycle on stand, but, Gagandeep again inflicted the blow on him. The said blow landed on his right arm. Meanwhile applicant Gaurav Kumar son of Chanan and Jaswinder son of Somnath, resident of Nangal Kalan, also came there and they had beaten the complainant with kick and fist blows. On hearing the commotions, people started gathering there. Consequently, Gagandeep and his companion fled away from there. Due to the beatings given by aforesaid persons, the complainant had suffered blood stained injuries on his head and arm. Thereafter, he has informed his younger brother Deep Singh, who took him to Civil Hospital Haroli. 6 9.4 On the basis of above facts, police registered the FIR under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS against the accused persons. 9.5. On 28.06.2025, CT Scan was conducted in Regional Hospital Una. On 01.07.2025, the medical opinion over the injuries found on the person of complainant Rajat Kumar was obtained and as per the final opinion given by the Medical Officer, injury No. 2 was declared to be grievous in nature and for injury No. 1 surgical opinion was needed. 9.6 Thereafter, on 04.07.2025, as per the final opinion the injury No. 1 was declared to be grievous in nature, caused by sharp weapon. As such, Section 118(2) of BNS was added, in this case. 9.7 Lastly, it has been mentioned in the status report that the applicants with the help of sharp edged weapon had inflicted the injuries on the person of the complainant and thereafter, they fled away from the spot. The efforts to nab the applicants were made, but, they could not be arrested. The applicants are stated to be clever persons and weapon of offence is yet to be recovered. 9.8 It is further case of the police that in case any relief is granted to the applicants under Section 482 of the 7 BNSS, they may indulge themselves in similar offence and also may not be available for the trial. 9.9 The investigation of the case is stated to be at the initial stage. According to the police, in case any relief is granted to the applicants, they may influence the witnesses and may also destroy the evidence. 10. On the basis of the above stand, vide order dated 16.07.2025, interim protection was given to the applicants and the matter was adjourned for 24.07.2025. 11. On 24.07.2025, police filed supplementary status report, disclosing therein, that applicants have joined the investigation and on 23.07.2025, applicant Gagandeep has produced the weapon of offence i.e. Khanda. Measurement of the same was conducted and the same was taken into possession. The weapon of offence was identified by injured Rajat Kumar. 11.1 As per the status report, weapon of offence has been recovered, however, the apprehensions which have been expressed, in the status report, filed on 16.07.2025, have been reiterated. 12. On the basis of the above submissions a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 8 13. The applicants are permanent residents of District Una and their custodial interrogation has not been sought by the police. In such situation, dismissal of the applications would be nothing but pre-trial punishment which is prohibited under the Law. 14. So far as the apprehension, which have been expressed by the police, in the status report, are concerned, for those apprehensions reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case, interim order dated 16.07.2025 is made absolute. 15. The role attributed to the applicants in the commission of alleged crime would be proved during the trial. As such, no useful purpose will be served by dismissing the bail applications. Moreover, the custodial interrogation of the applicants has not been sought by the police. As such, the applicants are able to make out a case in their favour. 16. Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that the interim order dated 16.07.2025 is liable to be made absolute. Consequently the said order is made absolute, and the applicants are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 73/2025, dated 28.06.2025, registered under Sections 126(2), 9 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, with Police Station Tahliwal, District Una, H.P., subject to 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. 17. 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 application; 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 d) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever. 18. 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 application. 19. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application(s), in case, any 10 of the bail conditions is found violated by any of the applicants. 20. Copy of this order be placed in the connected case file i.e. CrMP(M) No.1679 of 2025. (Virender Singh) Judge July 28, 2025 (Pramod Kumar)