2025:HHC:5255 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No.358 of 2025 Date of Decision: 07.03.2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gopal Krishan ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner: Mr. R.K.Gautam & Mr. Pawan Gautam, Advocates. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ASI Atul Kumar, PS Amb, District Una, H.P. present in person. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Bail petitioner namely Gopal Krishan, who is behind bars since 06.08.2024, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular/temporary bail in case FIR No.145 of 2021, dated 06.08.2021, under Sections 302, 34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Amb, District Una, H.P. 2. Since, it has been specifically averred in the petition that mother of the petitioner namely Smt. Archana Devi, who is more than 82 years, is seriously ill and at present is admitted in a 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Private Hospital at Mohali, this Court, while passing order dated 28.02.2025, specifically called upon learned Deputy Advocate General to verify factum with regard to ailment of mother of the petitioner and her treatment from the hospital concerned. 3. Though, in terms of aforesaid order, respondent/State filed status report, but since same was silent with regard to ailment of mother of the petitioner, this Court in pre-lunch session specifically called upon learned Additional Advocate General to file fresh status report about health condition of mother of the petitioner. 4. Pursuant to afore direction issued by this Court, learned Additional Advocate Generals has filed fresh status report dated 07.03.2025 enclosing therewith certain documents indicative of the fact that at present mother of the petitioner is admitted at Livasa Hospital, Mohali. As per certificate issued by Dr. Priyanshu Choudhary, Senior Consultant-Medical Oncology, mother of the petitioner is a patient of Acute Leukemia (Blood cancer) and at present, she is admitted in the hospital, with complaint of altered sensorium and fever. As per doctor, mother of the petitioner is hemo-dynamically stable, meaning thereby, her blood flow, blood pressure and heart rate are stable and she has good blood circulation. 2 5. However, there is no denial to the fact that petitioner’s mother is a patient of leukemia and is at fag end of her life, coupled with the fact that she is admitted in hospital for more than one month, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to enlarge him on temporary bail deserves to be considered. 6. Though having taken note of the fact that petitioner is accused of a heinous crime punishable under Section 302 of IPC, coupled with the fact that trial is nearing completion, this Court sees no reason to entertain the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail, but certainly on account of critical medical condition of the mother of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge petitioner on temporary bail, enabling him to attend to his ailing mother. 7. Since there is nothing in the status report to suggest that petitioner is a hardcore criminal, rather it is recorded in the status report that petitioner is an ex-serviceman, having deep roots in society, there are otherwise very bleak chances of petitioners fleeing from justice. Besides above, petitioner has movable and immovable property at his native place, as detailed in the memo of parties. Interestingly, though the wife of the petitioner is also an accused alongwith bail petitioner, but she has already been enlarged on bail. Since petitioner’s ailing mother, requires his care and affection, it would be in the interest of justice to enlarge bail- 3 petitioner on temporary bail, enabling him to attend to his ailing mother. 8. Consequently, in view of the above, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail is rejected, but in the peculiar facts and circumstances, as detailed hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of one month subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with one local surety of like amount to the learned trial Court at Una. As and when, needful is done by the petitioner in the light of the afore direction, Jail Superintendent, District Jail Bangarh at Una would enlarge petitioner on bail for a period of one month w.e.f 10.03.2025 to 08.04.2025. Needless to say, petitioner would report back in jail concerned on or before expiry of one month i.e. 08.04.2025 by 05:00 p.m., failing which, Police would be at liberty to arrest him. 9. A downloaded copy of this order shall be accepted by the learned trial Court, while accepting the bail bonds from the petitioner and in case, said court intends to ascertain the veracity of the downloaded copy of order presented to it, same may be ascertained from the official website of this Court. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge March 07, 2025 (sunil) 4