Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:HHC:32459 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.MP(M) No. 1310 of 2026 Reserved on : 04.08.2026 Decided on: 05.08.2026 Uploaded on: 05.08.2026 Rohit @ Ballu
…Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the applicant : Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional A.Gs., with Mr. Rohit Sharma & Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy A.Gs. Virender Singh, Judge ApplicantRohit @ Ballu, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
2 2026:HHC:32459 Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him on bail, during the pendency of trial, arising out of FIR No. 35/2022, dated 29.01.2022, registered with Police Station Sadar Kullu, District Kullu, H.P., under Sections 435, 427, 120B of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, as he has no concern whatsoever, with the crime in question and even during the investigation, the police could not collect any evidence, connecting the applicant, with the crime in question. 3. As per the applicant, he has been arrested, in this case, merely on the basis of suspicion and confessional statement, recorded before police at Punjab, where the applicant was arrested in some other case along with his co accused namely Ravi Tej Singh. 4. The investigation of the present case is stated to
3 2026:HHC:32459 be complete, as such, according to the applicant, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody. 5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. However, his application was dismissed vide order dated 02.06.2026. 6. Apart from this, Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has also submitted that the applicant has already been released on bail, in case FIR No. 21, dated 09.03.2022, under Sections 3, 4 of Explosive Substances Act, Sections 18, 20, 40, 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the UAPA’), registered with Police Station Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar. 7.
In addition to this, the applicant has also been released on bail in case FIR No. 241, dated 08.11.2021, registered under Sections 307, 427, 212, 120B IPC; Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substances Act; Sections 13, 17, 18, 18B, 20 of the UAPA; and Section 25 of Arms Act, registered with Police Station City Nawanshahr. 4 2026:HHC:32459
8. Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application. 10. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 29.01.2022, complainant Dine Ram, made a statement to the police under Section 154 Cr.P.C., which was recorded by HC Diwan Chand No. 74, I.O. Police Post Jari, in which, the complainant got recorded that he is resident of the address mentioned therein. They are four brothers and one sister. His younger brother had expired about 1012 years ago and his wife expired about 14 months ago, from the date, when, he had made the statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. 10.1 According to the complainant, he was having two vehicles, one vehicle was registered in the name of his wife and other vehicle i.e. Spark, bearing registration No. HP01K
5 2026:HHC:32459 2185, was purchased by him about nine months ago, from Pratap Rana of Jiya. Since, the said vehicle developed a technical defect, as such, the same was got parked at an open space on Jari – Manikaran road. He had checked the vehicle 78 days prior to the date of making his statement on 16.01.2022. He had kept the keys of the same with him.
10.2 According to the complainant, on 28.01.2022, when, he was sleeping at his house, then, at about 9:00 pm, he heard noise of some blast. Thereafter, his son Vijay informed that the said blast occurred in their vehicle No. HP01K2185 (Spark). In the blast, vehicle had totally been destroyed. He tried to ascertain the fact that who had committed the said act, however, he could not collect any information. He has expressed his suspicion that someone had caused blast in his vehicle intentionally. As such, he requested the police to take action, upon which, police registered the case under Section 435 of IPC and Section 3 of The Explosive Substance Act, 1908. 10.3 Thereafter, the initial investigation was handed over to Incharge Kulwant Singh and subsequently to ASI
6 2026:HHC:32459 Inder Dev, ASI Narpat Ram, HC Diwan Chand, HC Hemant Kumar and HC Praveen Kumar Cyber Cell, District Kullu, H.P. 10.4 During investigation, the spot was visited and spot map was prepared. The requisite papers regarding vehicle No. HP01K2185 were taken into possession. The spot was also visited by the team of RFSL Mandi. The physical evidence, so collected, was sent for chemical
analysis, from where, positive report has been received. As per the status report, efforts were made to nab the accused, but no clue was found. As such, untraced report was prepared and submit the same in the Court on 30.06.2023, which is still pending. 10.5 It is the further case of the police that on 19.03.2024, Incharge Police Post City1, Abohar, District Fazilka, Punjab vide letter No. 570/5A has informed that in Police Station City – 1 Abohar, FIR No. 44/2024 dated 15.03.2024 under Sections 25, 25(7)(i) of Arms Act was registered against Balvinder Singh alias Ballu and Ravitej Singh son of Sh. Gurdeep Singh. Both the accused were
7 2026:HHC:32459 arrested. From their possession one country made pistol along with two live cartridges were found. 10.6 Above two accused, during investigation, had disclosed that on 28.01.2022, they along with their companion, had also caused the bomb blast in the area of Police Station Sadar Kullu and about which FIR No. 35/2022 dated 29.01.2022, has been registered with Police Station Sadar Kullu. As such, a request was made that in case, the above accused are required in the said case, then the legal recourse be adopted, as the above accused have been remanded to judicial custody on 19.03.2024. 10.7 Thereafter, in the untraced report, order of reinvestigation was passed and investigation was again started. In pursuance of the information, the production warrants were obtained and both the accused were brought to Police Station Sadar Kullu. 10.8 During investigation, the accused persons had disclosed that in order to commit the said offences, one Kuldeep alias Sunny had paid an amount of Rs. One lakh, each, to them in cash. Thereafter, both the accused were
8 2026:HHC:32459 arrested and were produced before the Court, from where, they were remanded to police custody till 16.08.2024. 10.9 During investigation, both the accused persons were interrogated. During investigation, accused Balvinder and Ravitej Singh had disclosed that Kuldeep alias Sunny, Subh Karan alias Saajan, Rohit alias Ballu had come to Manikaran and on 28.01.2022 at about 8:00 – 9:00 pm, on the Jari Kanchi Mour, Balvinder had thrown the bomb in the open area, which was given to him by Kuldeep alias Sunny. Vehicle No. HP80A0163 was driven by Ravitej Singh and Sunny was with him and he can identify the said place.
10.10 Subsequently, Ravitej Singh was inquired, who has disclosed that he was driving the vehicle No. HP80A 0163 and others accused were there in the vehicle. Thereafter, Sunny had handed over the bomb to Balvinder Singh to throw the same in the open. He has also disclosed that he can identify the said place. 10.11 During investigation, both the accused has identified the said place and their statements under Section
9 2026:HHC:32459 27 of Indian Evidence Act was recorded. Thereafter, mobile data was obtained from the Service Provider and the presence of accused Shub Karan alias Saajan through his mobile phone No. 9592833509 was found to be in the area, where the incident had taken place, at about 7:45 pm on
28.01.2022. As per CDRs, the presence of Shub Karan alias Saajan was found in the Jari area. In this regard, the statement of Homeguard volunteer, who was posted at the relevant time at Additional SADA Barrier Sumaropa near Kasol was also recorded. The accused persons were found to be visiting the area in their vehicles bearing No. HP80A 0631 and PB65AH9494. 10.12 During investigation, accused persons have also disclosed that on 28.01.2022, after committing the crime, four persons came back to Punjab in two vehicles and stayed in a room in Mandi Gurudwara. During investigation, the record was obtained and it was found that five persons had stayed in Mandi Gurudwara. During investigation, the record of the statement of the accused persons, recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act,
10 2026:HHC:32459 in case FIR No. 44 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, registered with Police Station CityI Abohar, has also been obtained. 10.13 On the basis of the statements of the witnesses, Section 427, 120B of IPC were added, in this case.
10.14 On the basis of investigation, the following facts have been pleaded, as strong evidence, against the applicant: (i) On 28.01.2022, after committing the crime, it was found that the accused had proceeded towards Kullu and in this regard reliance has been placed on the record obtained from Gurudwara Mandi, where the accused had allegedly stayed. (ii) In order to commit the crime, the accused came in vehicle No. PB65AH9494 and HP80A0163 and both the vehicles were found to be registered in the name of accused Ravitej Singh and Rohit (applicant) and both these vehicles are in possession of the police being involved with case registered with Police Station CityI Abohar and Police Station Navashehar City. (iii) The accused were present on the date of occurrence along with their vehicle and in this regard reliance has been placed on the statement of HHG posted at SADA barrier. (iv) As per the CDRs of mobile phone No. 9592833509, issued in the name of Shub Karan, his presence was found in the area,
11 2026:HHC:32459 where the incident had taken place. (v) As per the report of the laboratory, the explosive substance was used in the commission of crime. 10.15 It is the further case of the police that the production warrant against accused Shubh Karan alias Saajan was issued by the Court of learned JMFCV Kullu, as he is lodged in Central Jail Gurdaspur. Consequently, on 06.09.2024, Shubh Karan alias Saajan was produced and his custody was transferred, in the present case. Thereafter, he was inquired and was arrested in this case, on 06.09.2024. 10.16 During police custody, he has disclosed that he and his coaccused Balwainder Singh alias Ballu had conducted the blast at Jari. Thereafter, his confessional statement under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act was recorded and he has identified the said place.
10.17 As per the status report, on 11.11.2024, the chargesheet against accused Balwinder Singh alias Ballu, Ravitej and Shubh Karan was prepared and presented before the Court of learned CJM Kullu. 12 2026:HHC:32459 10.18 It is the further case of the police that during investigation, it has been disclosed by the accused persons that the crime was committed by them along with Kuldeep alias Sunny, who is lodged in case FIR No. 241/21, dated 08.11.2021, under Sections 3, 4, 5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908, Sections 307, 427, 120B of IPC, Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18B of Anti Social Act and Sections 25, 54 and 59 of Arms Act, with Police Station Nawanshahar and he has been lodged in Central Jail Bhatinda. 10.19 Applicant Rohit alias Ballu, is also stated to be lodged in Central Jail Ludhiana, Punjab, in case FIR No. 21/2022, dated 03.09.2022, under Sections 3, 4 of Explosive Substance Act and Sections 16, 18, 20, 40 of UAP Act, registered with Police Station Nurpur Bedi, Punjab. 10.20 According to the police, the matter was required to be investigated from them, as such, production warrants were obtained and both the said persons were produced before the Court at Kullu, from where, they were remanded to police custody for five days. 10.21 During investigation, accused Rohit alias Ballu
13 2026:HHC:32459 (applicant) had disclosed that Kuldeep alias Sunny is in contact with Pakistani terrorist Harvinder Singh Rinda. Rinda is creating a fear on India. According to them, on 27.01.2022, Kuldeep alias Sunny, Balwinder Singh alias Ballu, Ravitej Singh, Shubh Karan alias Saajan, along with Rohit alias Ballu (applicant), had hatched a conspiracy and conducted the blast. Thereafter, at the instance of applicant Rohit alias Ballu, Kuldeep alias Sunny stayed at Mandi. 10.22 During investigation, it has also been found that after the blast, accused Rohit (applicant) by boarding the bus, reached back to his village. Accused Kuldeep alias Sunny had paid Rs.
One lakh each to the persons, who were involved in the crime. 10.23 On 09.06.2025, member of SIT, SI Ishant Sen was sent to Punjab and District Una, for investigation. He has inquired from the mother and girlfriend of accused Rohit (applicant) and their statements were recorded. The laptop of Amandeep (friend of applicant Rohit) was taken into possession. Thereafter, the correspondence was made with the AU Small Financial Bank, Una, as the vehicle of
14 2026:HHC:32459 applicant Rohit bearing No. HP80A0163 was financed by the said bank. On inquiry, it was found that due to the default in payment of installments, the possession of vehicle was taken away by the bank and vehicle is parked in Radha Rani Parking yard, Ropar. 10.24 SIT has also inquired from accused Rohit alias Ballu (applicant), Kuldeep alias Sunny and Shubh Karan, about the articles recovered from them in case FIR No. 241/21, with Police Station Nawanshahar City. When, Register No. 19 of Police Station Nawanshahar City, was perused, it was found that from the possession of accused Rohit alias Ballu (applicant), one Redmi phone; from the possession of accused Kuldeep alias Sunny, two phones i.e. Iphone 13 PRO and Iphone 13 PRO MAX alongwith Dongal and from accused Shubh Karan, Oppo phone was taken into possession by Punjab police. 10.25 Similarly, Register No. 19 with Police Station City1 Abohar was perused and it was found that in FIR No. 44/22, accused Balwinder @ Ballu and Ravitej, when arrested, vehicle No. PB65AH9494 and two phones were
15 2026:HHC:32459 taken into possession. Thereafter, on the application of the members of the SIT, the case property was transferred in case No. 35/22 with Police Station Sadar Kullu. 10.26 It is the further case of the police that data of mobile phones recovered from the possession of accused persons, in case FIR No. 241/21, Police Station Nawanshahar, were requested to be provided.
The attested copy of the said data was provided, which was analyzed. 10.27 It has also been found that in the mobile phone of accused Kuldeep alias Sunny, an audio message was found recorded, which was forwarded by Rohit (applicant) to Kuldeep alias Sunny through Iphone 12 of Aman. 10.28 Thereafter, the data of mobile phone Redmi allegedly recovered from the possession of accused Rohit alias Ballu (applicant) was analyzed. On analysis, an audio file of 19 minutes 22 seconds was found. In this recording, Rohit had discussed with Aman in the initial 2:36 minutes about the visit up to Mandi along with Sunny. Sunny has also given the reference regarding money. In the said recording, Rohit (applicant) has allegedly given the reference
16 2026:HHC:32459 to visit Manikaran along with Ravitej and Saajan. Sunny has also discussed about the factum of receiving Rs. 50,00,000/ for the work executed by him. 10.29 It is further stand in the status report that in case the applicant is released on bail, he may tamper with the evidence and may also influence the investigation. He may also coerce the witnesses and may again indulge in the same activity. The application is stated to be arrested in a serious offence, in which, punishment of rigorous imprisonment up to ten years, can be inflicted. 10.30 Lastly, it has also been apprehended that in case, applicant is released on bail, it will create resentment in the general public. 10.31 It is also the stand of the police, in the present case, that the evidence are being collected, keeping in view the provisions of UAPA. 10.32 On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 11. The applicant, in the present case, has been arrested on 29.05.2025. The trial against the applicant will
17 2026:HHC:32459 take sufficient long time. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody. 12.
Moreover, the applicant has already been released on bail, in two other cases by the orders passed by Punjab & Haryana High Court, in Criminal AppealD683 of 2025, titled as ‘Rohit @ Ballu Versus State of Punjab’, in which, he has been released on bail, in case FIR No. 21, dated 09.03.2022, registered with Police Station Nurpur Bedi, under Sections 3, 4 of Explosive Substance Act and Sections 18, 20, 40, 16 of UAPA; and the applicant has also been released on bail in case FIR No. 241, dated 08.11.2021, registered under Sections 307, 427, 212, 120B of IPC; Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substances Act; Sections 13, 17, 18, 18B, 20 of UAPA; and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered with police Station City Nawanshahr, vide order dated 02.04.2026. 13. The trial has not commenced in the present case and from the said fact, this Court is of the view that the chances of commencement and conclusion of the trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. 18 2026:HHC:32459
14. Considering the maximum punishment provided for the offences, for which the applicant has been arrested, this Court is of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case in his favour, as pretrial punishment is prohibited. 15. So far as the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed. 16. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 17. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released, on bail, in case FIR No. 35/2022, dated 29.01.2022, registered under Sections 435, 427, 120B of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908, registered with Police Station Sadar Kullu, District Kullu, H.P., on his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 19 2026:HHC:32459
18.
This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:
“a) The 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) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) The 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) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. e) The applicant shall furnish affidavit, in the first week of every month, before the learned trial Court, disclosing therein that he has not been named, as accused, in any crime, during that period.”
19. 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. 20. It is made clear that the respondentState is at
20 2026:HHC:32459 liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found to be violated by the applicant. 21. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail Kullu, H.P. through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software. 22. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail Kullu, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kullu. The Superintendent of Jail, District Jail Kullu, H.P. 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 05th August, 2026 (Pramod Kumar) PRADEEP Digitally signed by PRADEEP Date: 2026.08.05 15:38:31 +0530