1  2026:HHC:31520 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No.1272 of 2026 Reserved on : 29.7.2026 Decided on: 30.7.2026 Uploaded on:30.7.2026 Ajay Kumar … Applicant Versus State of H.P. …Respondent ___________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________ For the Applicant : Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. H.S. Rawat, Addl. AGs with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Dy. A.G. Virender Singh, Judge The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, for releasing him on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 12 of 2025, dated 15.2.2025, registered under Sections 103(1), 140(1), 3(5), 61(2) and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 2  2026:HHC:31520 the ‘BNS’), with Police Station, Panchrukhi, District Kangra, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated and arrested by the Police. According to him, he has no concern, whatsoever with the crime, for which, he has been arrested, in this case. 3. The applicant has pleaded that he is the sole bread earner of the family and has old parents to look after. 4. The applicant has further pleaded that he has tried his luck by moving bail application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palampur, Kangra, District Kangra, H.P., however, the same was dismissed on 30.4.2026. 5. Apart from this, it has been pleaded by the applicant that co-accused of the applicant Sushil Kumar has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order dated 17.7.2026, passed in Cr. 3  2026:HHC:31520 MP (M) No. 1238 of 2026. As such, relief of bail has been sought on the ground of parity. 6. According to the applicant, he is in judicial custody for more than 14 months, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody. 8. The applicant, through his counsel, has undertaken to abide by the terms and conditions, to be imposed by this Court, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 9. On these submissions, a prayer has been made to allow the bail applications. 10. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 15.2.2025, I.O./ASI Pawan Kumar, Police Station, Jwalamukhi, Police District, Dehra, Kangra has submitted a ruqua on the statement of Suresh Kumar (complainant), made under Section 173 4  2026:HHC:31520 BNSS, to the Police for registration of the FIR, upon which, the Police registered a case under Sections 140(1), 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS. The complainant has made the complaint against Nishu Bala, Sushil Kumar and Uttam Singh. 10.1 The complainant has got recorded in his statement that he is resident of the address mentioned in the complaint and working as labourer. He is having three children (two sons and one daughter). His elder son is stated to be doing a private job in Jammu, whereas, his younger son Pankaj Kumar is stated to be doing the work of collection of blood samples for laboratory. 10.2 According to the complainant, on 18.1.2025, son of complainant, namely, Pankaj Kumar (deceased) is stated to have left the house at 8:00 a.m. without disclosing to anyone, on motorcycle bearing No. HP 37H 5279 (Black in colour). At about 2:30 p.m., they came to know that 5  2026:HHC:31520 the motorcycle of his son Pankaj Kumar was found parked about 500 meters away from the house of the complainant, without handle-locked. Thereafter, the said motorcyle was brought back to the house and complainant and his wife had started looking for their son, in nearby places, but he was not found. 10.3 On 19.1.2025, Pankaj Kumar (deceased) was searched till evening and thereafter, at about 7:30 p.m., missing report of Pankaj Kumar was got lodged with Police Station, Panchrukhi, District Kangra, H.P. 10.4 On 13.2.2025, the complainant came to know that dead body of one un-identified person was found in the gorge at Jwalamukhi. The dead body was stated to be kept in mortuary of Civil Hospital, Dehra. The post-mortem of the dead body was stated to be got conducted on 15.2.2025, at RPGMC, Tanda, upon which, complainant and his daughter Rishva Dogra reached at mortuary of Tanda hospital 6  2026:HHC:31520 and said dead body was identified by them to be of Pankaj Kumar, on the basis of tattoo, on his right arm and from the clothes on the dead body. 10.5 On the basis of above facts, the complainant has expressed his suspicion that his son has been kidnapped and killed by the aforesaid three persons. The dead body is stated to have been thrown at the place, from where, the same was found. 10.6 On the basis of above facts, the complainant has prayed that action be taken against the aforesaid three persons, upon which, Police machinery swung into motion after registration of the FIR. 10.7 Thereafter, the aforesaid persons were arrested and investigation of the case was conducted by SI/SHO, Police Station, Panchrukhi. 10.8 On 17.2.2025, the spot was visited by ASI Pawan Kumar. The spot map was prepared. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. Forensic team was requested to visit the spot. Residential house of 7  2026:HHC:31520 accused Nishu Bala was also visited by the forensic team and from the bath room of house of Nishu Bala, blood stains were found, and outside bathroom, a pair of shoes was also found, which were also taken into possession. Spot map of the house of Nishu Bala was got prepared and spot map of the place, where motorcycle was parked, was also got prepared. 10.9. On 17.2.2025, S.P. Kangra, constituted a Special Investigating Team (SIT) and further investigation was entrusted to Inspector/SHO, Bhupinder Singh Thakur, whereas Dy. S.P. was appointed as Supervisory Officer. 10.10. It is the further case of the Police that accused Nishu Bala, during investigation, disclosed that her husband Sushil Kumar is teacher by profession, and she was having a love affair with deceased Pankaj Kumar, for the last seven years and they used to meet in her old house/store room, 8  2026:HHC:31520 when her husband used to be out for his duty. Husband of Nishu Bala came to know about this fact, as such, he got installed CCTV cameras in the house. But, according to Nishu Bala, said store room was out of range of CCTV cameras. As and when, Pankaj Kumar (deceased) used to come to her, she used to switch off the CCTV cameras. 10.11. It is the further case of the Police that Nishu Bala also disclosed that she had a quarrel with Pankaj Kumar (deceased), and due to this fact, she has got lodged two FIRs against Pankaj Kumar, with Police Station, Panchrukhi, which are stated to be pending adjudication in Court at Palampur. Pankaj Kumar (deceased) also used to harass her and used to pressurize her to withdraw the cases. 10.12 As per the stand taken in the status report, accused Nishu Bala also apprised this fact to her elder sister Rajni Bala (accused). 9  2026:HHC:31520 10.13. On 17.1.2025, Nishu Bala, alongwith her sister, had attended spiritual discourse in Asia Palace, Palampur, and on 18.1.2025, both had to attend a marriage in Asia Palace, Palampur, but, in the morning of 18.1.2025, when husband and children of accused Nishu Bala had gone to school, Pankaj Kumar came to the store room of Nishu Bala. At the relevant time, her sister Rajni Bala and her husband Ajay Kumar (applicant) came to the house of Nishu Bala and called her, upon which, accused Nishu Bala responded from the store room, upon which, both Rajni Bala and Ajay Kumar (applicant) came to the store room. On seeing Pankaj Kumar, Ajay Kumar (applicant) asked Rajni Bala as to who was he, upon which, Rajni Bala apprised him that he used to harass Nishu Bala for withdrawing the cases registered against him. On this, verbal altercation between Ajay Kumar (applicant) and Pankaj Kumar 10  2026:HHC:31520 (deceased) took place. Ajay Kumar (applicant) is stated to have become furious and stated to have inflicted two blows on the head of Pankaj Kumar with the iron rod, upon which, Pankaj Kumar (deceased) fell down in the store room. Accused Nishu Bala got frightened and screamed. Thereafter, Ajay Kumar (applicant) and Rajni Bala took Nishu Bala inside the room. After some time, when Ajay Kumar (applicant) again went to store room, he found that Pankaj Kumar had expired by that time. Ajay Kumar (applicant) is stated to have locked the store room. 10.14. It is the further case of the Police that accused Nishu Bala apprised her husband about the incident, however, her husband did not believe her and told her to attended the marriage. Applicant Ajay Kumar and Rajni Bala are stated to have left the place. Accused Nishu Bala is stated to 11  2026:HHC:31520 have attended the marriage and in the evening, her husband Sushil Kumar also attended the marriage. 10.15. At about 10:30 p.m., when, they came back from the marriage, her sister Rajni Bala told her to be in the room. Thereafter, her husband Sushil Kumar, Rajni Bala and Ajay Kumar (applicant) went to store room and wrapped the dead body in a blanket and put the dead body in the dickey of vehicle bearing No. HP 56A-2976, in order to dispose off the dead body. Later on, Sushil Kumar apprised Nishu Bala that they had thrown the dead body in the forest, where nobody can find the same. 10.16. It is the further case of the Police that during investigation, on 20.1.2025, accused Nishu Bala and Sushil Kumar made a statement, under Section 23 of the BSA and at the instance of Nishu Bala, spot was inspected and spot map was prepared. The SFSL team visited the spot and 12  2026:HHC:31520 collected the physical evidence. Accused Nishu Bala also got recovered the iron rod, with which Ajay Kumar (applicant) had inflicted the injuries on the head of Pankaj Kumar. The vehicle, used for disposing off the dead body of Pankaj Kumar, was also taken into possession, alongwith the documents and keys. 10.17. Sushil Kumar made a statement and on the basis of said statement, got identified the place, where, they had destroyed the evidence by burning the jacket, pair of shoes, tarpoline and rope. The burnt ashes were also taken into possession, from the spot. 10.18. Thereafter, Sushil Kumar has identified the place, where dead body of Pankaj Kumar was disposed off. Spot map was prepared. Sushil Kumar identified the place at Dehra, from where, he has thrown the mobile phone of Pankaj Kumar (deceased), in water. Spot map of said place was 13  2026:HHC:31520 also prepared. Thereafter, provisions of Section 61(2) of the BNS were also also added. 10.19. When, involvement of accused Rajni Bala, and her husband Ajay Kumar (applicant) was found, then, their custody was got transferred in the case, as both of them were already in judicial custody in a case, registered under Section NDPS Act. Both of them were remanded to the Police custody, till 25.2.2025. 10.20. As per the further stand of the Police, during investigation, applicant Ajay Kumar has contradicted the stand of accused Nishu Bala, Sushil Kumar and Uttam Singh. According to him, at a place known as Menjha, his wife Rajni Bala called him and his wife Rajni Bala, Nishu Bala, Sushil Kumar and his father in law applicant Uttam Singh were sitting in a vehicle No.HP56A- 2976. He was apprised that a boy, namely Pankaj Kumar (deceased), had died in the house of Nishu 14  2026:HHC:31520 Bala and they are going to dispose off his dead body, upon which, applicant Ajay Kumar, alongwith Sushil Kumar and Uttam Singh started searching for a place to dispose off the body. His father-in-law Uttam Singh by handing over the mobile phone of Pankaj Kumar, directed him to throw away the mobile phone. Thereafter, all of them returned back. 10.21 According to the further stand of the Police, before they could reach the house of Sushil Kumar, he apprised them that he has got installed CCTV cameras in the house and requested them to enter the house after he switches off the cameras. After CCTV cameras were switched off, they had gone to the store room of Sushil Kumar, where dead body was lying. All of them had wrapped the dead body in tarpaulin and put the same in the aforesaid vehicle. 15  2026:HHC:31520 10.22 Thereafter, they had thrown the dead body at a pre-identified place at Kalidhar forest, however, the dead body got stuck in the boulders, upon which, he and Abhishek Kumar dragged the dead body and threw the same in the bushes. Thereafter, they had burnt the jacket of deceased Pankaj Kumar, tarpaulin, rope, as well as, pair of slippers of Pankaj Kumar. 10.23 It is the further case of the Police that during investigation, on 22.2.2025, Nishu Bala confessed that she had killed Pankaj Kumar with hoe and got recovered the same, in pursuance of her statement, recorded under Section 23 of BSA. She has further got recorded in her statement that the mobile phone of Pankaj was with her, as she had taken out the mobile phone and keys of motorcycle of Pankaj Kumar (deceased) and mobile phone was handed over to her father Uttam Singh, in order to conceal/destroy the same. 16  2026:HHC:31520 10.24 It is the further case of the Police that since accused Nishu Bala, Sushil Kumar, accused Uttam Singh, applicant Ajay Kumar, Rajni Bala and Abhishek Kumar were in connivance with each other to destroy the evidence, as such, Section 238 of the BNS was added, in this case. 10.25. On the basis of the report, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., the learned Trial Court has framed the charges, against the accused persons, including the applicant and the case is now stated to be listed on 3.8.2026 to 7.8.2026 for PWs, pending before the learned Additional Sesions Judge, Palampur, H.P. In the present case, there are 40 witnesses, out of which, three have been examined. 10.26 As per the further stand of the Police, taken in the status report, following cases are stated to have been registered against the applicant: i) FIR No. 88 of 2013, dated 4.7.2013, under Sections 341, 323, 504, 34 IPC, registered with Police Station, 17  2026:HHC:31520 Bhawarna, in which, the applicant is stated to have been acquitted; ii) FIR No. 4 of 2013, dated 6.7.2013, registered under Section 395 IPC, with Police Station Kangra, H.P., in which, the applicant is stated to have been convicted; iii) FIR No. 261 of 2013, dated 27.12.2013, registered under Section 224 IPC, in which, the applicant has been convicted; iv) FIR No. 158 of 2021, dated 27.10.2021, registered under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., which is pending adjudication before the learned ADJ-II, Dharamshala, H.P.; v) FIR No. 25 of 2018, dated 27.1.2018, under Sections 451, 380, 411, 201 and 34 IPC, registered with Police Station, Mandi, H.P, which is stated to be pending adjudication, before the learned ACJM,Mandi, H.P.; vi) FIR No. 69 of 2022, dated 21.10.2022, registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC with Police Station, Dharamshala, which is stated to be pending adjudication before the learned CJM, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.; vii) FIR No. 209 of 2022, dated 2.12.2022, under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, registered with Police Station, Jogindernagar,, which is pending adjudication, before the learned ACJM, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P.; viii) FIR No. 19 of 2023, dated 21.2.2023, registered under Sections, 379, 201 and 34 IPC, with Police Station, Gaggal, which is pending adjudication before the learned ACJM, Kangra, H.P.; 18  2026:HHC:31520 ix) FIR No. 74 of 2024, dated 1.4.2024, registered under Sections 279, 304-A IPC with Police Station, Kangra, which is pending adjudication before the learned ACJM, Kangra, H.P.; x) FIR No. 19 of 2025, dated 26.1.2025, registered under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Dharamshala, pending adjudication before the learned ADJ-II, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.; xi) FIR No. 26 of 2025, dated 8.2.2025, registered under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Bhwarna, pending adjudication before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. 10.27 On the basis of aforesaid facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 11. Perusal of the record shows that the bail application of the applicant was dismissed by the learned trial Court on 30.4.2026. From the perusal of the copy of the charges framed against the accused persons, in the present case, which shows that the applicant has been charge-sheeted for the offences, punishable under Sections 60(2)(a), 61(2), read with Section 238 (a) and Section 3(5) of 19  2026:HHC:31520 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, this Court is of the view that prayer of the applicant for releasing him on bail, is liable to be accepted, as, trial of the case will take sufficient long time for its conclusion and no useful purpose will be achieved by keeping the applicant in judicial custody for indefinite period. Moreover, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under law, as the law presumes accused to be innocent, unless proven guilty. 12. Moreover, considering the fact that co- accused of the applicant, Uttam Chand and Sushil Kumar, who have also been charge-sheeted for the offences, for which, the applicant herein, has been charge-sheeted, have already been released on bail by this Court, vide order dated 30.5.2025, passed in Cr. M.P.(M) No.1028 of 2025, titled as, ‘Uttam Chand versus State of H.P.’, and vide order dated 17.7.2026, passed in Cr. MP(M) No. 1238 of 2026, titled as, ‘Sushil Kumar versus State of H.P.’, this 20  2026:HHC:31520 Court is of the view that the applicant is also entitled for the relief, on the ground of parity, as prayed for, in the application. 13. So far as the criminal history of the applicant, which has been pointed out by the respondent-State, in the status report, is concerned, on the basis of aforesaid stand of the Police, the relief, for which, the applicant is otherwise entitled to, cannot be declined to him. 14. So far as the apprehensions, which have been mentioned in the status report are concerned, reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case the applicant is ordered to be released on bail. 15. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 16. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 12 of 2025, dated 15.2.2025, registered under Sections 140(3), 21  2026:HHC:31520 103(1), 3(5), 61(2) and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, with Police Station, Panchrukhi, District Kangra, H.P. on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with two sureties, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. 17. 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 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. 18. 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 22  2026:HHC:31520 confined, only to the disposal of the present bail application. 19. 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 to be violated by the applicant. 20. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home, Dharamshala, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e- prison software. 21. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home, Dharamshala is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra. The Superintendent of the Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air 23  2026:HHC:31520 Correctional Home, Dharamshala is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the orders passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court. (Virender Singh) Judge 30.7.2026 Kalpana KALPANA Digitally signed by KALPANA Date: 2026.07.30 14:44:36 +0000