IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No. 2830 of 2025 Reserved on: 16.01.2026 Date of Decision:23.01.2026 Pushpa Devi ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Vacation Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner : Mr Ajay Kochhar, Sr. Advocate, with Mr Anubhav Chopra, Advocate.

For the Respondent/State : Mr Lokender Kutlehria, Addl.

Advocate General.

Mr Raju Ram Rahi, Advocate, for the informant/victim.

Rakesh Kainthla, Vacation Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 90 of 2025, dated 20.09.2025, registered in Police Station Chirgaon, District Shimla, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 107, 127(2) and 115(2) read with Section 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya

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

Sanhita (BNS) and Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC & ST Act).

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the child had died on 16.09.2025 during his treatment at IGMC, Shimla, because of the consumption of some poisonous substance. The petitioner was named as an abettor for the commission of the suicide by the child. These allegations are false; there is no material on record to connect the petitioner to the commission of the crime. She had not instigated the commission of the suicide by the child. Police investigated the matter in a biased manner due to political pressure. The petitioner is a woman and is entitled to the beneficial provisions of Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The police have filed the charge sheet, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, it was prayed that the petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

4. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the informant lodged an FIR stating that his son was lying unconscious on 16.09.2025 at 7:30 PM. The informant took him to the hospital, from where he was referred to IGMC Shimla. The child died on 17.03.2025 at about 1:30 am at IGMC Shimla. He had consumed some poison. The informant came to know on 18.09.025 that the child was beaten up and harassed. He had told his mother, Sita Devi, that Pushpa Devi (bail petitioner) and 2-3 persons had beaten and locked him in the cow shed. The petitioner was saying that the child had touched her house, and he would not be released till a sacrificial goat was brought. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. The charge-sheet was filed before the Court on 24.11.2025. The material evidence was collected and sent to SFSL Junga for analysis. A supplementary charge sheet would be filed after receipt of the report of the analysis. Hence, the status report.

5. I have heard Mr Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr Anubhav Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Addl. Advocate General for the respondent/State and Mr Raju Ram Rahi, learned counsel for the informant/victim.

6. Mr Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent, and she was falsely implicated. Allegations in the FIR, even if taken to be true, do not constitute the abetment of suicide. The Police have not conducted a fair investigation and have acted under political pressure. The petitioner is a woman and is entitled to special protection under Section 480 of the BNSS. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail. He relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in Banti Devi Vs. State of HP along with connected matter (2025:HHC:2268) and Geeta Devi Vs. State of HP (2025:HHC:4174)

in support of his submissions.

7. Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Addl. Ad