Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Saurabh Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh –Respondent
CrMP s (M) No. 837 & 839 of 2025
Decided on : 30-04-2025

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Ashok Sharma, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Vinod Chauhan and Ms. Anubhuti Sharma, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by ASI Piar Singh, Police Station West, Shimla, H.P.

Bail applications cannot be denied as a form of punishment; applicants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and reasonable conditions can be imposed to ensure investigation integrity.

Headnote:
(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 298, 324(4), 115(2), 351(2), 79, 118(1), 118(2) - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 482 - Bail applications - Applicants sought bail apprehending arrest in FIR for alleged religious sacrilege and land grabbing - Court emphasized presumption of innocence and that pre-trial punishment is prohibited - Interim bail granted with conditions to join investigation and not to influence witnesses. (Paras 1-22)

(B) Bail - Conditions - Court can impose reasonable conditions to ensure investigation is not hampered and witnesses are not coerced. (Paras 14-19)

(C) Presumption of Innocence - Applicants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment. (Paras 15-16)

JUDGMENT :

(Virender Singh, J.)

The above-titled bail applications are being disposed of by the common order, as, both the bail applications have been filed, in the same FIR, i.e. FIR No. 206 of 2024, dated 17^th November, 2024, registered under Sections 190 , 191 (2) , 191 (3), 298 , 324 (4) , 115 (2) , 351 (2), 79 , 118 (1) and 118 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNS ’), with Police Station West, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P.

2. Apprehending their arrest in the above-noted FIR, these bail applications have been filed by the above- named applicants, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNSS ’), for passing a direction, in their favour, directing the Investigating Officer/police of Police Station West, District Shimla, H.P., to release them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in the above-noted FIR.

3. According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in this case, by the police. They have termed the case of the police, as false and frivolous.

4. It is the case of the applicants that the present FIR has been lodged against them purely on false and concocted grounds.

5. The applicants have also given the history of the incident, on the basis of which, the instant FIR has been registered against them.

6. According to the applicants, their custody is not required for any purpose and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping them in judicial custody, as the very genesis of the case against the applicants is doubtful and imaginary.

7. As per the applicants, they are ready to abide by any condition(s), to be imposed by this Court, in case, any direction is issued to the police/Investigating Officer, under Section 482 of the BNSS .

8. On the basis of the above facts, the applicants have prayed that the bail applications may kindly be allowed.

9. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 17^th November, 2024, complainants-Vishal Sharma, Mahender Kumar, Harish Kumar and Dharampal Thakur, Trustees of Brahmo Samaj, near AG Office, Shimla, moved a complaint, before the police, requesting therein to take action against Tanmahimananda, Ramrupananda, Lalit Verma, Sandeep Kumar, Karan Nanda, Nitin Vyas, Sheetal Vyas and Vinod Aggarwal.

9.1. According to them, a programme on the occasion of 133^rd Conference of Brahmo Samaj had been planned to be organized in Kali Bari Temple Hall on 15^th and 16^th November, 2024 and members from all over India had come to attend the same.

9.2. It has been mentioned in the complaint that on 16^th November, 2024, at about 5.00 pm, the followers of Brahmo Samaj had gone to Temple premises to offer prayers. The said programme continued peacefully from 05.00 – 06.00 pm, and religious ceremonies were also performed. After some time, Sant Tanmahimanand and Ramrupanand entered the premises and started misbehaving with the ladies, who were performing pooja there. Due to their act, the religious feelings have been hurt.

9.3. It has been averred by the complainants that despite requests made by the complainants, Tanmahimanand had not permitted them to establish kalash. Thereafter, when the followers of Brahmo Samaj were peacefully performing their prayers, Swami Tanmahimanand, alongwith his goons, had assembled in the Temple premises. Police was also called there and in the presence of police and administration, Swami Tanmahimanand and Ramrupanand, Lalit Verma, Sandeep, Karan Nanda and Vinod Aggarwal had caused disturbance in the prayers of the followers of Brahmo Samaj.

9.4. According to the complainants, Advocate Sheetal Vyas and her husband Nitin Vyas had also instigated the followers of ABVP, BJP and Bajrang Dal. With the intention to kill the complainants, stones are also stated to have been pelted upon them and they were also attacked with flower pots and sticks. Due to this, ten devotees suffered injuries. Not only this, those persons had also attacked the