2025:HHC:5835 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.76 of 2025 Decided on : 12.03.2025 Raj Kishor …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Sh. Ashok Kumar, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, for respondent No.1. Mr. H.S. Rana, Advocate for respondent No.2/complainant. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Raj Kishore has surrendered to the custody of this Court on 07.01.2025 and thereafter, he has been ordered to be released on interim bail. 2. The applicant has sought the bail, during the pendency of the case, bearing FIR No.06 of 2025 dated 06.01.2025 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 299, 352, 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’) and Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled 1Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:5835 Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SC&ST Act’), with Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. 3. The relief has been sought on the ground that the complainant has given colour of criminal offence, under the SC&ST Act, whereas, no prima facie offence, under the said Act, is made out. 4. As per applicant, he is having deep roots in the society. 5. On the basis of above facts, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate has given certain undertakings, on behalf of applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 6. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, on 07.02.2025, disclosing therein that the complainant has moved a complaint, before the police, mentioning therein that he is the resident of Village and Post-Office Nangal, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. At about 10:00 am, when, he was present at Nangal Service Station, then, Raj Kishor Rana (applicant) came there on his bike and as soon as, he reached there, said Raj Kishore (applicant) had attacked on his turban. The turban of the 3 2025:HHC:5835 complainant was removed from his head and subsequently, he also pulled his beard. 7. Not only this, according to the complainant, applicant has also given leg blows to him. He has also made caste-based aspersions, against the complainant. 8. According to the complainant, he is from Gujjar Community and due to this fact, the applicant has uttered that he will kill the Gujjar and that had he been having scissors, he would have cut his hair. 9. Not only this, applicant has also abused the parents of the complainant and also made aspersions against his religion. Harsh and Aslam were also present there, who had taken the complainant away. According to the complainant, had they not been present there, then, the applicant could kill the complainant, as, he was having small sword with him. 10. Lastly, it has been stated by the complainant that by attacking on his turban, the applicant has attacked on the entire Sikh community. 11. On the basis of above facts, complainant has prayed that the action be taken against the applicant. 4 2025:HHC:5835 12. Consequently, FIR, in question, has been registered against the applicant. 13. In this case, complainant has also put appearance and filed the objections, mentioning therein that the applicant has committed the heinous offence, as, the offence, committed by the applicant, is not against the individual, but, against the society at large. 14. Highlighting the criminal history of the applicant, it has been prayed that the present bail application may be dismissed. 15. On 05.03.2025, supplementary status report has been filed, according to which, investigation, in the present case, is complete and the challan has been prepared against the applicant. 16. On the basis of above facts, Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, appearing for respondent No.1/State, as well as, Mr. H.S. Rana, Advocate, appearing for respondent No.2/ complainant, have vehemently opposed the relief, as claimed in the application. 17. Heard. 5 2025:HHC:5835 18. The FIR, in question, has been registered, under Sections 299, 352, 351(3) of the BNS and Section 3(1)(r) of the SC&ST Act. 19. After releasing the applicant on interim bail, the applicant has joined the investigation, as depicted in the status report, filed on 05.03.2025. 20. Moreover, when, a specific stand has been taken by the police that investigation, in the present case, is complete and the challan has been prepared, then, dismissing the bail application would be nothing, but, remanding the applicant to judicial custody. 21. Even otherwise, the allegations, which have been levelled, against the applicant, will be proved during the trial. Furthermore, the bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as, pre-trial punishment is prohibited, under the law. 22. The applicant is the permanent resident of Tehsil Nalagarh District Solan, H.P., and as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, the interim order is made absolute, he may not be available for the trial. 23. Consequently, the interim order dated 07.01.2025 is made absolute, by virtue of which, the 6 2025:HHC:5835 applicant was ordered to be released on bail, subject to the condition that the applicant will abide by the conditions, as enumerated in para No.6(ii) to 6(v) of the said order. 24. 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. 25. The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when chargesheet will be filed in the competent Court of law. 26. 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. ( Virender Singh ) Judge March 12, 2025 ( Gaurav Thakur )