IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2447 of 2025 Pa/w Cr.MP(M) No.2601 of 2025 Reserved on:- 22.11.2025.

Date of Decision: 2H5.11.2025 Cr.MP(M) No.2447 of 2025 Rohit Kumar …Applicant Versus State of H.P. r …..Respondent ___________________________________________________________

Cr.MP(M) No.2601 of 2025 Vinay Kumaro …Applicant C Versus State of H.P. ..Respondent Coram:

gThe Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 HFor the applicant(s) : Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate, in Cr.MP(M) No.2447 of 2025.

Mr. Rohit Chauhan, Advocate, in Cr.MP(M) No.2601 of 2025.

For the respondent(s) : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick and Mr.

H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by ASI Ashwani Kumar, Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, H.P.

Virender Singh, Judge

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

The above-titled bail applications are being disposed of by this common order, as, both the. bail applications have been filed, in the same FIR, i.e. FIR No.80 of 2024, dated 24.06.2024 (hereinafter refeHrred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 341, 147, 149, 323, 425 and 302 of IPC (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Indian Penal Code’), with Police Station, Chowari, District Chamba, H.P.

2. The abouve-mentioned bail applications have been filed, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing the above-named applicants, on bail, in the FIR in question, during the pendency of the trial.

3. According to the applicants, they are innocent ipersons and have falsely been implicated and arrested, by the police, in this case.

4. As per the applicants, they have no concern whatsoever, with the crime in question. Moreover, according to them, the police has already completed the investigation and submitted the charge sheet, before the competent Court of law, upon which, the cognizance has been taken and the charges have been framed and now, the case is stated to be listed for PWs. .

5. According to the applicants, nothing has been found, during the investigation, in the Hstatements of the material witnesses and from the evidence, so collected, by the police, no connection whatsoever, with the crime in question could be established, against them.

6. It is the further case of the applicants that it is the story of the pruosecution that the applicants themselves tried to save the deceased and in that process, applicant-

Vinay Kumar had sustained injuries.

7. Highlighting the fact that there are total 31 prosecution witnesses and for recording the statements of the said prosecution witnesses, Court will take sufficient ilong time and no useful purpose would be served, by keeping the applicants, in judicial custody.

8. The applicant-Rohit Kumar has earlier tried his luck by moving the similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., however, his application has been dismissed on 06.06.2025, whereas, applicant-Vinay Kumar has filed the similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., however, the same has been dismissed on 29.08.2025. .

9. Apart from this, the applicants have also pleaded that one of the accused, in the present casHe, is minor and he has already been released on bail, by this Court, as the CCL has filed the Criminal Revision No.262 of 2025, which was decided on 20.06.2025.

10. On the ground of parity, the applicants have prayed that duringu the pendency of the trial, they may kindly be released on bail.

11. Apart from this, the applicants through their counsel have also given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicants, for which, they are ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.

i12. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the applications.

13. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report,