IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No.323/2025 a/w CR. MP(M) Nos.356, 369 & 384 of 2025 Date of Decision: 30th April, 2025. 1. Cr.MP(M) No.323 of 2025 Amandeep Singh .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent. 2. Cr. MP(M) No.356 of 2025 Avtar Singh .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent 3. Cr. MP(M) No.369 of 2025 Lakhwinder Singh .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent 4. Cr. MP(M) No.384 of 2025 Jagdeep Singh .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. N.S. Chandel, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vinod K. Gupta, Advocate in Cr. MP(M) Nos.323 and 369 of 2025. M/s Yug Singhal and Hitender Verma, Advocates in Cr. MP(M) No.356 of 2025. Mr. Sangram Singh Chandel, Advocate in Cr. MP(M) No.384 of 2025. For the Respondent: Mr. R.K. Negi, Additional Advocate General. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The bail petitions, in the case at hand, are being taken up together, as they are arising out from the common FIR. The incident in the case at hand is dated 04.12.2024. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status report. Copy whereof, has also been supplied to learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 3. From a perusal of the record, it is evident that one Sh. Hemraj through Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha (bail petitioner in Cr. MP(M) No.369 of 2025) had been granted a contract for lifting of scrap from Synergy Company situate in Bir Palasi (Baddi). For lifting of the scrap from the concerned Nalagarh Union, a truck bearing No.HP-12Q-3844 had been engaged on 03.12.2024. The said truck had reached the Synergy Company for lifting of scrap on 04.12.2024. 4. Insofar as, the contract for lifting scrap is concerned, previously the same qua Synergy Company was held by one Yusuf. From the record, it appears that when the truck sent by Hemraj for lifting scrap reached the Synergy Company, Robin, Sukhwinder @ Kala had stopped the associates of Hemraj, who were legally authorized to lift the scrap, as a consequence whereof a scuffle ensued. 5. Subsequent to the aforesaid, alleged scuffle at the premises of Synergy Company, as per the version of the prosecution, the present bail petitioners along with six others, three out of which are absconding, had given beatings to Jaspreet, Lakhwinder Singh, Dilbagh, Yusuf, Dharampal, Hardev and Jhujjar Singh at another place on the same day. The aforesaid individuals were brought to the hospital by Pawan 3 Kumar at whose behest the FIR, in the case at hand, was registered. Nature of injuries i.e. on four individuals are blunt grievous, on four other individuals are simple and insofar as one is concerned, it has yet to be determined. 6. The investigation, in the case at hand, is complete and post completion of investigation, challan in case at hand has been filed before the concerned Court in the month of January, 2025 w.r.t. the present bail petitioners. 7. In coming to the determination that whether the party, if admitted to bail, would appear to take trial, three elements need to be kept in mind, namely the charge, the nature of evidence by which it is supported and the punishment to which the party would be liable, if convicted. At the time of deciding a bail application, a detailed discussion of evidence, so collected and produced by the prosecution is to be avoided as it may cause prejudice either to the case of the prosecution or to the case of the bail petitioner. As already stated supra, the investigation, in the case at hand, is complete. No further recoveries are to be affected from the petitioners. 8. In the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances, respondent/State submits that nothing has to be recovered from the bail petitioners and neither is their custodial interrogation warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4 9. Learned Addl. Advocate General submits that the bail petitioners had been cooperating, in the case at hand, and had participated regularly in the investigation. The purpose of bail is to secure the presence of accused at the trial. No criminal antecedents of the bail petitioners have been highlighted in the status report except Lakhwinder Singh (bail petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.369 of 2025). No adverse material has been placed on record by the prosecution, wherefrom it may be deduced that the bail petitioners would not turn out for trial. 10. Punishment begins after conviction. Every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence 11. The petitioners are permanent resident of State of Himachal Pradesh and the respondent-State has not expressed any apprehension of the petitioners fleeing from justice. In any case, the petitioners can be put to terms for the purpose of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 12. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed and interim protection dated 24.02.2025, 27.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 in Cr. MP(M) Nos.323 & 384 of 2025, Cr.MP(M) No.356 of 2025 and Cr.MP(M) No.369 of 2025, respectively are made absolute, subject to following conditions:- 5 (i) The petitioners shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law. (ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever.; (iii) The petitioners shall not contact the complainant, threaten or browbeat him or to use any pressure tactics in any manner whatsoever; (iv) Petitioners shall not make any inducement, threat The petitioners shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.; (v) The petitioners shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer; (vi) The petitioners shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any 13. In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is made clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned trial Court shall decide the matter without being influenced by above observations. With the aforesaid observations, the present petitions stand disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. Downloaded copy of this judgment is valid for compliance. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 30th April, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)