IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.444 of 2026 Decided on: 08.05.2026 __________________________________________________________ Teena Yadav ...Petitioner Versus H State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram f Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Soharma, Judge

1 Whether approved for reporting?

For the petitioner: Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent: Mr. Pawan Kumar Nadda, Additional Advocate General.

Ranjan Shoarma, Judge Bail petitioner [Teena Yadav], being in custody since 22.01.2025, has come up before this hCourt, seeking regular bail, under Section 483 of gthe Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sahinta, [referred to i as ‘BNSS’], originating from FIR No.5 of 2024, dated 23.01.2024, under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code and Section 66-D of Information and Technology Act, registered at Police Station, Cyber Cell, Central Zone, Mandi, District Mandi [H.P.], with subsequently added Sections 419, 201 read with Section 120B IPC.

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

FACTUAL MATRIX IN BAIL PETITION:

2. Case set up by Learned Counsel is that a false case has been registered against Pthe bail petitioner, in which, she was arrested on 22.01