IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No. 2972 of 2025 Reserved on: 16.01.2026 Date of DecisionH:23.01.2026 Irfan Mohd. ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Vacation Judge.

Whether approvoed for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr Peeyush Verma, Sr.

Advocate, with Mr Kush Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent/State : Mr Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Vacation Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 145 of 2025, dated 01.07.2025, registered in Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 333, 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 351(2) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

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

2. It has been asserted that the petitioner is innocent and that he was falsely implicated because of political rivalry. The allegations against the petitioner are false. T.he petitioner was beaten, and he had sustained multiple injuries. The police have filed the charge sheet, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody; hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail. r

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the informant Harpal Chaudhary and Vikram were present in the informant’s house on 01.07.2025. Vikram had met with a n accident, and his leg was plastered. His friend Surjeet, Vaibhav, Vishal, Sunil and Anas Khan had visited the informant’s house to inquire about Vikram’s well-being. All of Hthem were talking to each other. Five people armed with sticks and an iron rod came to the house at 5:40 pm. They had covered their faces. They gave beatings to the informant and other persons. The informant party shouted for help, and the villagers gathered on the spot. One person, who identified himself as Irfan (the present petitioner), was apprehended. The injured were taken to the hospital for treatment. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. Irfan revealed during the investigation that Sandeep, Nigam, Adil, Ashu and Sohail Khan were involved in the incident. Police arrested Soh.ail Khan. He revealed during interrogation that he had handed over his motorcycle bearing registration no. HP17C-0390 to Adil. Adil, Irfan, Ashu, Sadakat, Sandeep and Nigam drove two motorcycles to the spot. They returned at about 6:30 pm and revealed that Irfan was apprehended orn the spot. FIR No. 190/2023, dated 02.12.2023, is registered against the petitioner in Police Station Kala Amb. As per the report of the medical officer, the injured had sustained grievous injuries. The chargesheet was prepared and p resented before the learned Addl. Session Judge, Paonta Sahib on 27.09.2025. The petitioner would indulge in the commission of similar offences and intimidate the witnesses, in Hcase of his release on bail. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have heard Mr Peeyush Verma, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr Kush Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner and Mr Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent/State.

5. Mr Peeyush Verma, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The police have filed the charge .sheet, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The petitioner has roots in society, and he would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Mere pendency of the criminal case is no reason to deny bail to a person. He prayed that trhe present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail. He relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Mrityunjay Kumar Singh @ Mrityunjay @ Sonu Singh (2024 INSC 404) and Abhim anue Vs. State of Ker