IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MP(M) No. 2521 of 2025

Reserved on: 28.11.2025

Date of Decision: 04.12.2025

______________________________________________________________ Raman .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh

...Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting? No

For the Petitioner : Mr. K.S Gill, Advocate.

For the Respondent- : Mr. Jitender K. Sharma,

State Additional Advocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

gThe petitioner has filed the present petition for

seieking regular bail in FIR No. 39/24 dated 26.03.2024 registered at Police Station Rampur, Distt. Shimla, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 323

and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution’s case, the informant and the deceased were celebrating Holi and consuming liquor together, when the wife of the accused

____

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

told him that some people were touching her inappropriately under the influence of liquor. The accused asked them to leave the place. This led to a scuffle. The allegations of beating were levelled against the petitioner and others. The police recorded the confessional statement of the brother of the accused, which is legally inadmissible. There is nothing on record to prove the common intention shared by the petitioner with the co- accused. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 28.03.2024. He belongs uto a respectable family, and there are no chances of his aobsconding. The police have already filed a charge-sheet, Cand no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose upon him; hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed Hand the petitioner be released on bail.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report, asserting that the informant Dil Bahadur, Rajender Bohra (since deceased) and others were celebrating Holi on 25.03.2024 in the house of Tilak. The informant asked Sagar to join the celebrations. The informant and Rajender consumed liquor. One drum was brought, and the people started dancing on its beat.

One person objected to the noise being created, which led to a scuffle. Rajender Bohra was beaten. The informant tried to save Rajender Bohra, but the informant was attacked with a sharp- edged weapon. The informant ran away from the spot. Subsequently, Rajender Bohra succumbed to his injuries. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. The police arrested Ming, Sagar Thapa and Raman. Dil Bahadur produced the blood-stained zipper, which was seized by the police. Ming made a diusclosure statement, which led to the recovery of the knifoe. As per the report of analysis, the blood- stained zipperC and the blood-stained knife yielded highly degraded DNA. However, the DNA profile obtained from the high neck and lower of Ming, the hood and pants of Sagar Thapa, and the undervest of the petitioner matched the DNA Hprofiles obtained from the blood sample of Rajender Bohra (since deceased). As per the post-mortem report, the deceased Rajender Bohra died due to the cumulative effect of intracranial haemorrhage and hemorrhagic shock. The result of the investigation shows that Ming, Sagar Thapa, and the petitioner, Raman, had given beatings to Rajender Bohra and Dil Bahadaur. Rajender Bohra was seriously injured, and he succumbed to his injuries. Raman, Sagar and Ming had absconded and were apprehended while going towards Nepal. The charge sheet has been filed before the Court. Statements of 21 witnesses have been recorded out of 47 witnesses cited by the prosecution. The matter is listed before the learned Trial Court on 22/23.12.2025. Hence, the status report.

4. I have heard Mr K.S. Gill, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr Jitender K. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate Ge