1.  2026:HHC:2720 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2921 of 2025 Reserved on:- 06.01.2026 Date of Decision: 08.01.2026 Navneet …Applicant Versus State of H.P. …..Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. N.K. Bhalla, Ms. Chehak Bhalla and Mr. Sushant Vir Singh Thakur, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Navneet has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him on bail, in Case FIR No.57/2024, dated 08.07.2024, registered under Section 304, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), with Police Station Kasauli, District Solan, H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. 2026:HHC:2720 ) 2. According to the applicant, he has been arrested in this case, on the statement of one Yaman. After registration of the case, the police has investigated the matter. 3. According to the applicant, he has nothing to do with the offences, for which, he has been arrested by the police in this case. 4. It is the case of the applicant that the investigation, in the present case, is complete and as such, nothing is to be recovered from him. All these facts have been pleaded to show that his custodial interrogation is no longer required and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in the judicial custody. 5. The applicant has earlier tried his luck, by moving similar application bearing Bail Application No.161- S/22 of 2024, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, H.P., however, the same was dismissed on 18.09.2024. Thereafter, the applicant has moved bail application i.e. Cr.MP(M) No.2418 of 2024, before this Court, which was dismissed on 22.11.2024. 3. 2026:HHC:2720 ) Applicant has also moved Cr.MP(M) No.2520 of 2025, which was dismissed, as withdrawn on 20.11.2025. 6. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Navneet Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chehak Bhalla and Mr. Sushant Vir Singh, Advocates, appearing for the applicant, have given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 7.1. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 08.07.2024, complainant Vijay Kumar produced a complaint before the police for registration of the FIR, mentioning therein that his father Shri Himanshu Sharma (since deceased) has been murdered by accused. Elaborating the stand, it has further been mentioned, in the complaint that on the night of 18.06.2024, the complainant received a call on his mobile phone from one Brij Mohan, disclosing therein that his son is found lying in rain-shelter at Kimoghat, in a terrible and 4. 2026:HHC:2720 ) unconscious condition, upon which, he reached at the spot and found his son lying unconscious. 7.2. It is the further case of the police that according to the complainant, it appears that some drug was administered in his body. With the help of others, he took him to CHC Dharampur, from where, he was referred to Maharishi Markandeshware University & Hospital, Sultanpur, where, doctor shifted him on ventilator and disclosed him that his condition is very critical. The doctor has also told him that it is a police case and a case of overdose of some dangerous drug administered in his body. Thereafter, the son of the complainant was referred to PGI Chandigarh, where, he was admitted in emergency in ICU. However, he remained in coma for 8 days and ultimately, on 27.06.2024, he expired. Thereafter, his postmortem examination was conducted. 7.3. According to the complainant, he has enquired about the matter and found that Yaman and Navneet were seen at the same place and time with some unusual activities, where son of the complainant was found. Against Navneet, the complainant has already filed complaint and 5. 2026:HHC:2720 ) he has also threatened the complainant to face consequences of this complaint. 7.4. On the basis of the above facts, he has prayed that action may be taken against the accused persons. 7.5. Subsequently, Police has registered the case, under Sections 304, read with Section 34 IPC and criminal machinery swung into motion. 7.6. On 08.07.2024, the police has visited the spot and prepared the map. The statement of the complainant- Vijay Kumar was got recorded, under Section 183 of BNSS by producing him before learned ACJM Kasauli. On 08.09.2024, the account statement of the complainant from SBI Kasauli was obtained and it was found that from 01.01.2024 to 16.05.2024, there were 27 transactions from the bank account of deceased in favour of Navneet and he had transferred a sum of Rs.29,100/- in the account of Navneet. The eye-witness Yaman has also been associated and his statements, under Section 180, as well as, 183 of the BNSS have been recorded. In the statement, Yaman had disclosed that on 18.06.2024, Himanshu had gone to Kalyan Café Kasuali, under the influence of liquor, where, 6. 2026:HHC:2720 ) he has disclosed to accused Navneet that he is not feeling well, and requested him to leave him to his house, upon which, Yaman and Navneet took Himanshu to his house in the vehicle. However, on the way Himanshu disclosed that he is not feeling well and requested them to take him to hospital and thereafter, they took Himanshu to hospital at Dharampur, where, doctor apprised them that it is a police case and asked them to call police. Upon which, Himanshu requested them to leave him at his house. On the way, Himanshu also told them that he is in dire need of some intoxication and requested them to leave in rain-shelter, thereafter they had left him at rain-shelter. 7.7. The police has also relied upon the postmortem report, given by the doctor, which reads, as under:- “As per Hospital Record, as per MLR No.32, CHC Dharampur, the deceased was brought by his father in state of unconscious with BP 108/76 mmhgm PR98/min. RR 18/min. He was referred to higher center on attendants requests. As per death summary of PGIMER, Chandigarh, the deceased was admitted with alleged history of opioid overdose and intubated in view of altered sensorium on 19.06.2024. On further evaluation, he was diagnosed with acurte liver injury and multiorgans dysfunction syndrome with serology 7. 2026:HHC:2720 ) positive for Hepatitis C. urine toxicology screening done for drug of abuse and found to be positive for morphine, alcohol and tramadol. The deceased had suffered a episode of ventricular tachycardia and even after successful resuscitation of CPR, he again went to cardiac arrest and declared dead”. 7.8. As per the report of FSL Junga, from the blood sample of the deceased Himanshu, the consumption of morphine, tramadol and alcohol was found and as per the report of the Visera, Fentanyl and Amphetamine and alcohol was there. 7.9. After the completion of the investigation, challan has been filed in the Court of learned ACJM Kasauli, on 05.11.2024 being Illaqua Magistrate. 7.10. It is further case of the police that the accused, for a considerable time, has indulged in selling the Chitta to the youth and three cases under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, have already been registered against him. The particulars of which have been given as under:- (i) FIR No.127 of 2022, dated 06.08.2022, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with Police Station Dharampur. (ii) FIR No.87 of 2022, dated 13.10.2022, under Section 21 & 29 of NDPS Act, with Police Station Kasauli. 8. 2026:HHC:2720 ) (iii) FIR No.53 of 2024, dated 27.06.2024, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with Police Station Kasauli. 8. Lastly, it has been mentioned that Himanshu has expired, due to the overdose of Chitta, as such, there is lot of resentment against applicant, in the area. Hence, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 9. As per status report, case bearing FIR No.127 of 2022, dated 06.08.2022, under Section 21 of ND&PS Act, registered with Police Station, Dharampur, is pending adjudication, in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasauli and now case was listed for PWs on 25.02.2026, whereas, case arising FIR No.87 of 2022, dated 13.10.2022, under Sections 21 and 29 of ND&PS Act, registered with Police Station, Kasauli, is also pending adjudication, in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Kasauli and fixed for 12.04.2026, for the service of the accused. In addition to this, case arising FIR No.53 of 2024, dated 27.06.2024, under Section 21 of ND&PS Act, registered with Police Station, Kasauli is listed for 10.06.2026 for PWs, whereas, the charge sheet, in the present case, was filed in the Court of learned 9. 2026:HHC:2720 ) Additional Sessions Judge-I, Solan, on 05.11.2024 and case was listed on 03.01.2026, for consideration on charge. 10. From the above fact, it can be concluded that the trial against the applicant has not yet commenced. Although, the charge sheet was filed way back on 05.11.2024, in the competent Court of law, however, after lapse of more than one year, even, the charges could not be framed against the applicant. 11. From the above fact, this Court can easily conclude that the chances of commencement and conclusion of the trial, against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. The bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as the accused is presumed to be innocent unless proven guilty. 12. So far as the other cases are concerned, which has been registered against the applicant and detail of the same have been given in foregoing paras are concerned, admittedly in none of the case, the applicant has been convicted by the competent Court of law, nor, any efforts have been made by the police to move the appropriate application for getting the bail cancelled, in those cases. 10. 2026:HHC:2720 ) 13. In the absence of judgment of conviction against the applicant, the relief of bail, for which, the applicant is otherwise, entitled cannot be declined to him. Pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law, as dismissal of the application, would be nothing, but sentencing him to judicial custody/police custody. 14. At the time of deciding the bail application, the Court should not dwell deep into the merits of the case to ascertain the guilt/innocence of the accused, as the same is the prerogative of the learned trial Court to determine, on the basis of the evidence, so adduced before it. 15. Applicant is permanent resident of District Solan, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, the the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for the trial. 16. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the present bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 17. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released, on bail, during the course of trial, arising out of FIR No.57 of 2024, dated 08.07.2024, registered under 11. 2026:HHC:2720 ) Section 304, read with Section 34 of IPC, with Police Station, Kasauli, District Solan, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 18. 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. 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. 12. 2026:HHC:2720 ) 20. It is made clear that respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found 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 Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e- prison 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 Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendent of Jail, District Jail Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, 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 January 08, 2026 (subhash) PRADEEP Digitally signed by PRADEEP Date: 2026.01.08 17:26:23 +0530