IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2680 of 2025 Date of Decision:-19.11.2025 Raghu Nath …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. Pranshul Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General, with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by HC Brij Mohan No.03, Police Station, Darlaghat, District Solan, H.P. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Raghu Nath has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.47 of 2025, dated 10.06.2025, registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 109, 126(2), 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 238, 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya

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

Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station, Darlaghat, District Solan, H.P.

2. The relief of the bail has been sought on the ground that the applicant has been arrested, in a false case and presently, he is in judicial custody.

3. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has no connection, whatsoever, with the crime in question. He has termed the case of the prosecution, as highly doubtful and according to him, nothing is to be recovered from him.

4. It is the further case of the applicant that the investigation, in the case is completed. All these facts have been pleaded to show that no useful purpose would be served, by keeping the applicant, in judicial custody.

5. In addition to this, he has also stated that the present case is nothing, but, counter blast to the case FIR No.46 of 2025, dated 09.06.2025, registered under Sections 332-C, 115(2), 3(5) of BNS.

6. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Pranshul Sharma, 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.

7. The applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 11.07.2025. Thereafter, the applicant has moved Cr.MP(M) No.1837 of 2025, before this Court, which was dismissed, as withdrawn on 05.09.2025.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has prayed that the co-accused of the applicant has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide orders dated 09.09.2025 and 31.10.2025, passed in Cr.MPs(M) No.1773 of 2025 and 2499 of 2025, hence, the applicant is entitled for the release of bail on the ground of parity also.

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 09.06.2025, an information regarding the scuffle/quarrel had been received in the Police Station, upon which, the then, Incharge Moti Singh, along with other police officials, in order to verify the facts reached at Arki Hospital, where, Vijay Kumar and Mahender Kumar, were found to be admitted for treatment.

10.1. During verification, one Chandni, moved a complaint, mentioning therein, that she is resident of village Kanderli, Post office Bhararighat, Tehsil Arki, District Solan, H.P., whereas, Hanuman Nath is their neighbour and their houses are adjoining to each other.

10.2. According to the complainant, they had fenced their land. On 09.06.2025, Hanuman Nath along with his wife, Neelam and sons Triloki, Raghu, Sibu, who were having sticks, in their hands, came and started removing the fence, upon which, complainant, along with her husband, Vijay had gone to prevent them, from doing so, they had started quarreling with th