1 2025:HHC:29407 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No. 1789 of 2025 Reserved on : 27.8.2025 Decided on: 30.8.2025 Nagesh Kumar …Applicant Versus State of H.P. & ors. …Respondents ___________________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ___________________________________________________________ For the Applicant : Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General, for respondent No. 1/State. Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Pranshul Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant Nagesh Kumar has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) seeking his release on bail, during the pendency of trial, arising out of case FIR No. 23 of 2025, dated 10.4.2025, 2 2025:HHC:29407 under Section 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’), and Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the POCSO Act”) registered with Police Station, Arki, District Solan, HP. 2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated, in the present case, as he is an innocent person and has nothing to do with the present case, and the FIR lodged against him is nothing, but, abuse of process of law. 3. According to the applicant, one lady teacher was caught red handed, while taking massage from a girl student and the applicant warned the said teacher and the student for not indulging in such type of activities. In this regard, the applicant has relied upon the video, which, he has recorded in his mobile phone, and is with the investigating agency. 4. As per the stand of the applicant, due to said grudge, the lady teacher used the child victim as a tool, against the applicant. 5. The applicant has tried his luck by moving similar bail application before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Solan, H.P., which was dismissed, on 23.7.2025. 3 2025:HHC:29407 6. The applicant, through his counsel, has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 7. On all these submissions, Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate has prayed that the bail application may kindly be allowed. 8. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 10.4.2025, Inspector/SHO Rajinder Singh, alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty, towards Shalaghat and Bangora. When, the police party reached near Kotli school, then, Tehsildar Vipin Verma telephonically informed him that at Kotli school, one teacher has teased a girl student, and requested him to reach at the spot. When, the police party reached at the school, then the complainant moved the complaint, before the SHO/Inspector Rajinder Singh, disclosing therein that he is resident of the address, mentioned in the complaint and his younger daughter (child victim) is studying in 10th standard in Govt. High School ‘X’. 8.1 According to the complainant, the child victim disclosed to her mother that the Drawing Teacher, namely, Nagesh Kumar (applicant) used to do obscene acts with her. 4 2025:HHC:29407 The child victim disclosed to her mother that the applicant used to call her all alone in his room and state that he is attracted towards her. Sometimes, the applicant is stated to have given bad touch to the child victim and used to touch her on her waist and shoulders. The applicant is stated to be harassing the child victim, for the last one year. On 8.4.2025, the incident was disclosed by the child victim to the wife of the complainant and he has made the complaint on 9.4.2025 to the Head Mistress. 8.2 Hence, the complainant has prayed that action be taken against the applicant. 8.3 On the aforesaid facts, the Police registered the case. Thereafter, criminal machinery swung into motion. On 10.4.2025, medico legal examination of the child victim was got conducted at Civil Hospital, Arki and her MLC was obtained. The spot was visited and spot map was prepared. Thereafter, statements of child victim and her parents were recorded, under Section 180 of BNSS. The applicant was arrested on 10.4.2025 and he was also medico legally examined. 8.4 After completion of investigation, police has filed the charge sheet in the competent Court of law (trial Court), on 5 2025:HHC:29407 30.5.2025 and the case is now fixed on 26.8.2025, for consideration on charge. 9. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 10. In this case, the child victim, as well as, the complainant were impleaded as respondents No. 2 and 3 and notices were issued to them, who have put appearance, through their counsel, and filed objections, reiterating the factual position, as mentioned in the FIR. 11. Highlighting the gravity of the offence, it has been prayed that the applicant being teacher, can easily influence the child victim and other witnesses, who are his colleagues. As such, respondents No. 2 and 3 have alleged that the applicant, through his known persons, has threatened the child victim and her family members, not to oppose the bail application. 12. On the basis of above facts, respondents No. 2 and 3 have prayed to dismiss the bail application. 13. So far as objections, which have been raised by respondents No. 2 and 3, are concerned, although, in para No.6 of the preliminary objections, it has been mentioned that the applicant, through his known persons, has threatened the child victim and her family members, not to oppose the bail 6 2025:HHC:29407 application, however, this fact is not sufficient to accept the said contention, as the matter has neither been reported to the Police, nor such stand has been taken by the Police, in the status report. 14. Considering the maximum punishment, provided for the offence, this Court is of the view that the applicant, who is in judicial custody, since 10.4.2025, is entitled for the relief of bail, as no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 15. The applicant is permanent resident of District Shimla, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for trial. 16. No other case is found to have been registered against the applicant, as such, presumption of innocence is still available to him, till his guilt is proved by the prosecution, during trial. 17. Moreover, chances of conclusion of trial, against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period. 7 2025:HHC:29407 18. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 19. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of trial, arising out of FIR No. 23 of 2025, dated 10.4.2025, under Section 75 of the BNS, and Section 10 of the POCSO Act, registered with Police Station, Arki, District Solan, HP., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 20. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) Applicant shall 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) Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case, in any manner, whatsoever; c) Applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer, and d) Applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 21. 21. Any of the observations, made herein above, 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. 8 2025:HHC:29407 22. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 23. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Kanda Jail, Shimla, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 24. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Kanda Jail, Shimla, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Shimla. The Superintendent of Kanda Jail, Shimla, is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court. (Virender Singh) Judge 30th August, 2025 Kalpana RAJNI Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.08.30 14:03:48 +0530