1.  ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.3000 of 2025 Reserved on: 31.12.2025 Date of Decision: 06.01.2026 Vishal Awasthi …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. Yashveer Singh Rathore, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General, with Ms. Avni Kochhar Mehta, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by ASI Birbal Singh, Police Station Patilkuhal, District Kullu, H.P. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Vishal Awasthi, 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, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.81 of 2025, dated 27.08.2025, registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station, Patlikuhal, District Kullu, H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.  ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and was arrested by the police on 13.12.2025. Presently, he is in judicial custody. 3. According to the applicant, the case registered against him is totally baseless and imaginary. 4. Elaborating his stand, it is the further case of the applicant that the present FIR is outcome of a concocted story made by the prosecution to harass him. The prosecution story is also stated to be highly improbable. 5. It is the further case of the applicant that his father had filed a complaint with regard to the incident in question, to the police, prior to the filing of the complaint, by the present complainant, however, owing to the influence exerted by the complainant on the police, the FIR of the applicant’s father was lodged later, with a view to give undue advantage to the complaint. In the incident, which has been lodged by the father of the applicant, it has been got lodged that the parents of the applicant were beaten by the complainant, as well as, his accomplices. 6. The relief of bail has also been sought on the ground that the family of the applicant had strained relations, with the 3.  ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) complainant, however, the said dispute was amicably settled by way of the compromise. 7. The applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, H.P., however, the said application was dismissed, vide order dated 17.12.2025. 8. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Yashveer Singh Rathore, 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 application. 9.1. When, put to notice, the police filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 27.08.2025, complainant Rakesh Kumar, made a complaint to the police, mentioning therein, that he is resident of village Ghurdorh, Post Office Larakelo, Tehsil and District Kullu, H.P. On 27.08.2025 at about 10:45 AM, he along with his wife Vijeta, were on their way to home, however, Deshraj Awasthi, Vishal Awasthi (applicant) and his mother Sudesh Awasthi had obstructed the path and verbal altercation took place. During that period, Vishal Awasthi 4.  ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) (applicant) has inflicted a blow on his head and left arm with iron rod. He has also inflicted injuries to the wife of the complainant with the said rod. The mother of Vishal Awasthi (applicant) had pulled the hair of the wife of the complainant. He has also got lodged that the accused persons, although are their neighbours, but they were raising quarrel with them. The accused persons had also threatened to kill the complainant and his wife. The incident was allegedly witnessed by Tharban Thakur, Raghubir and Varun Sharma. Had these persons not been present there, then, the assailants would have finished them. 9.2. He has further deposed that he was taken to hospital by Tharban Thakur, Raghubir and Shyam, from where, he was referred to Regional Hospital, Kullu. On the basis of the above facts, he has prayed that strict action be taken against them. 9.3. On the basis of the above facts, the police registered the FIR, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2), read with Section 3(5) of the BNS. The investigation of the case was initially entrusted to ASI Birbal Singh. Complainant and his wife were medico legally examined at Regional Hospital Kullu and their MLCs were obtained. At the instance of the complainant-Rakesh Kumar, the spot was visited and spot map 5. ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) was prepared. From the spot, weapon of offence, i.e. stone, was taken into possession. 9.4. On 12.12.2025, final opinion from the Medical Officer on the MLCs of the injured and his wife were obtained. The Medical Officer declared the injuries on the person of complainant and his wife, as grievous and the injuries, on the person of his wife Vijeta were declared to be dangerous to life, upon which, Sections 109 and 117(2) of BNS were added in this case. On 13.12.2025, the accused Vishal Awasthi, Deshraj Awasthi and Sudesh Awasthi were associated and were arrested. 9.5. On 14.12.2025, accused persons were produced before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, from where, they were remanded to police custody for three days. During police custody, accused persons have not disclosed anything, about the weapon of offence (Iron pipe). 9.6. On 16.12.2025, accused persons were again produced, before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, from where, they were further remanded to police custody for two more days. On 16.12.2025, applicant-Vishal Awasthi allegedly made a disclosure statement, disclosing therein, that the iron pipe, with whom, he had beaten the complainant and his wife Vijeta, the same has been concealed by him and he is 6. ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) having the exclusive knowledge of the same and he can get it recovered, upon which, his confessional statement, under Section 23 of BNS was prepared. In pursuance of the said statement, applicant- Vishal Awasthi got recovered the iron pipe, from the ground floor of his house, kept near the wall of his old shop. The said iron pipe was identified by the complainant and his wife. The said weapon of offence was taken into possession. 9.7. It is the further case of the police that on 17.12.2025, accused Deshraj Awasthi and Sudesh Awasthi were released on bail, however, the bail application of applicant- Vishal Awasthi has been dismissed. 9.8. Lastly, it has been pleaded that apart from the present case, another case bearing FIR No.79 of 2024, dated 15.09.2024, under Sections 332(C), 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS was registered against the applicant, with Police Station Patlikuhal. The said case is still pending adjudication. 9.9. It is the further case of the police that at the instance of Desh Raj Awasthi, father of the applicant, FIR No.82 of 2025, dated 27.08.2025, under Sections 126(2), 115 (2), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS has also been registered against complainant- Rakesh Kumar, his wife Vijeta and neighbour Tharban Kumar, with Police Station Patlikuhal. 7. ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) 10. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 11. As per case of the prosecution, the applicant has inflicted, blow with the help of rod, on the person of complainant. In addition to this, wife of the complainant had also sustained injuries, which, according to the complainant, has been attributed to the applicant. Even, the doctor concerned, has declared injuries, on the person of the complainant, as grievous and the injuries, on the person of wife of complainant, Vijeta, as dangerous to life. 12. Perusal of the record shows that applicant-Vishal Awasthi made a statement, under Section 23 of BNS, on 16.12.2025, disclosing therein, that he has concealed iron pipe and is having the exclusive knowledge of the same and got recorded that he can get the same recovered. 13. In pursuance of the said disclosure statement, he got recovered the weapon of offence i.e. iron pipe and on the measurement, length of the said pipe was found to be 2 feet 3 inch and the said recovery was got affected, by the applicant, according to the case setup by the police, from the shop of the ground floor of his building, which was concealed inside the shutter. 8. ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) 14. Considering the said stand of the police, in light of the submissions, made by learned counsel appearing for the applicant that the applicant and his family members are victims, as attack has firstly been made upon them, by Rakesh Kumar son of Tara Chand. In this regard, applicant has relied upon the document Ex.P2, which is the copy of FIR No.82/2025, dated 27.08.2025, lodged by Deshraj Awasthi, who is father of the applicant, against Rakesh son of Tara Chand (applicant), by mentioning the fact that on 26.08.2025, when, he was returning back from his field, then, Rakesh Kumar (complainant), obstructed his way and tried to inflict injuries upon him, with the help of spade (Faavda) by making ten attempts, however, he has saved himself and fled away from there. Thereafter, on 27.08.2025, Rakesh along with others, had pelted stones upon them and not only this, he had allegedly beaten Deshraj and Sudesh. The present FIR i.e. FIR No.81 of 2025, was lodged on 27.08.2025, at 18:18 PM, whereas, FIR No.82 of 2025, was lodged on 27.08.2025 at 19:13 PM. 15. FIR No.82 was lodged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS, whereas, the present case has been registered, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS. 9. ( 2026:HHC:1504 ) 16. Considering the fact that on the basis of the medical report, in which, the injuries on the person of injured were declared, as dangerous to life and Sections 109 & 117(2) of BNS was added, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case for releasing him on bail, at this stage, as release of the applicant on bail, would give a wrong signal to the society that after committing, such a henious offence, the applicant is still moving freely in the society. This will also encourage other people to take law in their hands. 17. At the time of deciding the question of bail, a delegate balance between the individual liberty and the larger interest of the society is to be maintained. 18. Admittedly, the investigation is still going on and considering the specific allegations, as well as, factum of recovery, in pursuance of his disclosure statement, the applicant is not able to make out a case in his favour at this stage. Consequently, his bail application is dismissed. Record be returned back to quarter concerned. (Virender Singh) Judge January 06, 2026 (subhash)