1  2025:HHC:29422 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CrMP(M) No. : 1714 of 2025 Reserved on : 11.08.2025 Decided on : 30. 08.2025 Farida …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. K.S. Gill, Legal Aid Counsel. For the respondent : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by ASI Yashpal, Police Station Kihar, District Chamba, H.P. Virender Singh, Judge. Applicant-Farida has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing her on bail, during the pendency of trial, 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2  2025:HHC:29422 arising out of FIR No. 38 of 2023, dated 9th June, 2023, registered under Sections 302, 201, 120 B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) read with Section 3 (2) (v) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘SC&ST Act’), with Police Station Kihar, District Chamba, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, she is the permanent resident of the address, as mentioned in the bail application. 3. As per the applicant, she is innocent and has falsely been implicated, by the police, in this case. 4. It is the case of the applicant that she has been arrested in contravention to the established principles of law. 5. According to the applicant, there is no legal evidence against her to connect her with the alleged offence. The story of the prosecution is stated to be a made-up story, by the police. 3  2025:HHC:29422 6. It has been averred in the bail application that the investigation of the case is complete and no recovery, whatsoever, has been effected from the applicant. 7. As per the case of the applicant, she is in judicial custody, as such, her custodial interrogation is no more required by the police. 8. The relief of bail has also been sought on the ground of delay in trial, as, according to the applicant, only a few prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 9. According to the applicant, she, being a woman, is entitled for a special protection. 10. The applicant has also tried her luck by moving similar bail application, before the learned trial Court, however, her application was dismissed, vide order, dated 5th April, 2025. 11. Apart from this, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 4  2025:HHC:29422 12. On the basis of the factual position, as mentioned in the application, a prayer has been made to release the applicant on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 13. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 8th June, 2023, complainant-Raju has got lodged the report, regarding missing of his son, in which, he has disclosed that his son- Manohar is working at Bhitti and used to transport the goods on mules. 13.1. As per the complainant, on the day, when he made statement, his son had come from Bhitti to Jasoh, for transporting the stones. His son had talked with him on phone, and, on the next day, his phone was found to be switched off. 13.2. Thereafter, as per the status report, the police has taken the requisite steps to trace Manohar, son of the complainant. He was searched for on 8th June, 2023, but, could not be found. Thereafter, service provider was requested to provide the call details of said Manohar. 5  2025:HHC:29422 13.3. On 9th June, 2023, when ASI Rajesh Kumar was searching for Manohar and reached Halari Nala, about 6 km away from Sanghni, he noticed a shoe lying there. The said shoe was identified to be the shoe of Manohar. Thereafter, during search, in the rivulet, a sack was found to be buried, between the stones in the flowing water, inside which, a blanket was also visible. Upon this, DySP and forensic team visited the spot and in the presence of RFSL team, the said sack was taken out from the rivulet and on checking, the same was found containing both the legs of Manohar, alongwith one blanket. At a short distance from there, underneath the stones, the head and arms of the deceased were found and the remaining parts of his body were also found nearby. 13.4. The team of forensic experts inspected the spot. Photographs were clicked and videography of the place was also done. The physical evidence from the spot was also collected. Thereafter, the dead body was sent for post mortem examination. After the post mortem examination, the dead body was handed over to the uncle of the deceased. 6  2025:HHC:29422 13.5. It has been mentioned in the status report that on 10th June, 2023, the IO has associated one Shabeer, brother of the Child in Conflict with Law (hereinafter referred to as ‘CCL’), in the investigation of the case, who disclosed that his sister, i.e. CCL, used to talk with Manohar, which fact was not liked by his family members. Manohar and CCL used to meet each other in the absence of their family members. 13.6. On 6th June, 2023, when, Shabeer, alongwith his cousin sister (CCL), aunt Fareeda, cousin sister Cheena and maternal uncle’s daughter Bano, was present at his house at Khadrog, and his uncle Musafir Hussain had gone to his another house at Sanghni, Manohar came to their house. Thereafter, a verbal altercation took place between Shabeer and Manohar, regarding his closeness with CCL, upon which, he, CCL, Cheena, Bano and Fareeda (applicant) gave beatings to Manohar Lal with kick and fist blows and sticks. His mobile phone was also snatched. The incident was also videographed from the mobile phone, which, later on, was deleted. 7  2025:HHC:29422 13.7. During this incident, Shabeer had called his uncle Musafir Hussain and let Manohar to go from there. On the same day, at about 2.00 p.m., when, Musafir Hussain reached near his house at Khadrog from Sanghni, he found Manohar lying in an injured condition. He took him to his cowshed and called his family members, but, by that time, Manohar had died. Thereafter, Musafir Hussain, without any information, returned back to Sanghni and subsequently, with the help and in connivance with Fareeda (applicant), Bano, Cheena and CCL, cut the dead body of Manohar into pieces and buried the same in Halari nallah. 13.8. It has been mentioned in the status report that in order to conceal the identity of the deceased, the accused persons conspired and Musafir Hussain, with the help of CCL, took the dead body to Halari nallah and cut it into six pieces and burnt the face with kerosene oil and petrol. The bottles, containing the inflammable substance, and the mobile phone of the deceased were thrown in Sanghni nallah, as such, police has added Section 201 and 34 IPC, in this case. 8  2025:HHC:29422 13.9. Accused-Shabeer Ali was arrested on 10th June, 2023. Thereafter, the forensic team visited the residential house of Shareef Mohammad at Khadroga and taken into possession one axe having blood stains, one pair of shoes and one plank, containing blood stains, as well as, the samples of blood stains from the wall of the cowshed were preserved. 13.10. Further investigation was entrusted to Inspector Babu Ram. During investigation, IO has inquired the matter from accused-Musafir Hussain and applicant- Fareeda. Both of them had confirmed the factual position, as was revealed by accused-Shabeer Ali. Both of them were also arrested on 13th June, 2023 and were medico- legally examined. 13.11. On 15th June, 2023, accused-Shabeer Ali, after getting his statement, under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, recorded, got recovered one darat, nylon rope from his house at Khadrog and the clothes of deceased and one plastic sack from the nallah, which were taken into possession. 9  2025:HHC:29422 13.12. On the same day, accused-Musafir Hussain had identified the cow shed, where, he had taken the deceased on 6th June, 2023. Consequently, the spot map was prepared. 13.13. As per the further case of the police, during investigation, it has been found that deceased Manohar used to talk to CCL, which was objected to by accused- Shabeer Ali and his family members. On 5th June, 2023, deceased Manohar came to the house of the accused and inquired about CCL, but, at that time, only Cheena was present there and the other family members had gone to the fields. In the evening, when they returned back, Cheena told them about the visit of Manohar. On 6th June, 2023, when Manohar was on his way to Sanghni, alongwith his mules, and reached near the house of the accused persons, at about 7.15 a.m., he went to the house of the accused persons, but, on seeing accused-Shabeer Ali on the door of the house, he was about to return back. By that time, accused-Shabeer Ali called him to come to their house and have tea. Upon this, Manohar went to their kitchen and started talking with them. After some time, he 10  2025:HHC:29422 inquired from CCL as to why she was not talking to him. Thereafter, accused-Shabeer Ali got furious and caught hold of Manohar and he alongwith Fareeda (applicant) and CCL started giving beatings to Manohar. When Manohar tried to flee from there, he was nabbed and was taken to the cowshed, where, he was again beaten by the accused persons. The said incident was also videographed by accused-Shabeer Ali. After beating him for a considerable time, accused-Shabeer Ali called his uncle accused-Musafir Hussain and made his aunt Fareeda (applicant) to talk to him. They apprised the accused-Musafir Hussain about the incident, who advised them to let him go, upon which, after beating Manohar, they let him to go from there. On the same day, accused-Musafir Hussain, at about 2.00 p.m., reached near his house, he met Manohar, who was injured, and took him to his cowshed. He also called his family members, but, by that time, Manohar had died. Thereafter, they cut the dead body into pieces and buried the same. 11  2025:HHC:29422 13.14. As per the status report, after completion of the investigation, the police has filed the challan, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. 13.15. It has been mentioned in the status report that statements of 17 prosecution witnesses have been recorded, three have been given up. The case is stated to have been listed on 28th August, 2025, for recording the statements of PWs-21 to 26 and on 29th August, 2025, for recording the statements of PWs-27 to 31. 14. On the basis of the above facts, it has been apprehended that the applicant is involved in a heinous crime and in case, she is released on bail, there will be a lot of resentment in the area, and the applicant may coerce the witnesses by alluring them to depose in her favour. 15. On these submissions, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 16. The applicant has been arrested for a heinous offence (murder), as well as, destruction of the evidence, hatching criminal conspiracy and also, under the SC & ST Act. 12  2025:HHC:29422 17. Perusal of the police record shows that after the recovery of the dead body of Manohar, police has started the investigation. Since, the name of accused Ruksana was mentioned, as such, the police had inquired from her on 10th June, 2023 and her brother Shabeer was associated in the investigation, who has disclosed about the fact that the alleged scuffle had taken place, in which, Manohar was beaten allegedly by Ruksana, Cheena, Bano and Farida (applicant). 18. When accused-Farida (applicant) was inquired, then, according to the police, as per the revelations made by accused Musafir Hussain and Farida (applicant), their involvement was found and they were arrested. 19. The statement, under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, was made by accused Shabeer Ali, and he allegedly got recovered the weapon of offence. On 15th June, 2023, accused Farida (applicant), during the police custody, made a disclosure statement, under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, disclosing therein, that on 6th June, 2023, she, alongwith Ruksana, Bano, Cheena, Sabeer Ali had a quarrel with Manohar and they had 13  2025:HHC:29422 beaten him also and thereafter, accused Farida (applicant) identified the cow shed, where, she, Ruksana, bano, Cheena, Shabeer Ali had beaten Manohar Lal and from the bushes, on the lower side of the said cowshed, got recovered the wooden stick, which was taken into possession, after measuring the same. Accused-Farida (applicant) also allegedly disclosed that from this wooden stick, on the day of incident, Manohar was beaten. Although, the said disclosure statement would be proved during the trial, but, at the time of deciding the bail application, the said material piece of evidence cannot be ignored. 20. As per the allegations, which have been levelled against the applicant, when, deceased-Manohar was at their house, the applicant, alongwith other accused persons, had given beatings to him, due to which, Manohar had died. Thereafter, as per the allegations, applicant- Farida, in connivance with other accused persons, had cut the dead body into pieces and in order to conceal its identity, buried the same into the rivulet. These facts speak voluminously about the seriousness of the offence. 14  2025:HHC:29422 21. Considering the specific allegations, which have been levelled against the applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case, at this stage, in her favour, as, releasing her on bail would give a wrong signal to the society, that after committing such a heinous crime, the applicant is still moving freely in the society. 22. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case read with the allegations, levelled against the applicant, according to which, the dead body of Manohar was found cut in six pieces and was buried at a distant place, on different locations, after pouring inflammable substance over its face, the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, in the status report, cannot be said to be unfounded, at this stage. 23. Even otherwise, keeping in view the pace of the trial, this Court is of the view that there is no undue delay in the progress of the trial. 24. Moreover, while deciding the question of bail, a delicate balance between the individual liberty and larger interest of the society has to be maintained. 15  2025:HHC:29422 25. Considering all these facts, the applicant is not able to make out a case for grant of bail, at this stage. Consequently, the bail application is dismissed. 26. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the learned trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. ( Virender Singh ) Judge August 30, 2025 ( rajni )