Mohit Sharma Vs State of Hp and Anr.

¶1

1 2025:HHC:31837

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶3

Cr. MP(M) Nos. 2110 of 2025 to 2112 of 2025

¶4

Reserved on : 12.9.2025 Decided on : 16.9.2025

¶5

Cr. M.P. (M) No. 2110 of 2025 Mohit Sharma ...Applicant Versus State of H.P. & anr. ….Respondent 2. Cr. M.P. (M) No. 2111 of 2025 Swati Sharma ..Applicant Versus State of H.P. & anr. ...Respondents 3. Cr. M.P. (M) No. 2112 of 2025 Parul Sharma ..Applicant Versus State of H.P. & anr. ..Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? _______________________________________________________

¶6

2 2025:HHC:31837

¶7

For the Applicants : Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Advocate.

¶8

For the Respondents : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No. 1.

¶9

Mr. Arun Sehgal, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

¶10

Virender Singh, Judge

¶11

This order of mine shall dispose of the above

¶12

titled three bail applications, which have been filed by the applicants, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’) in case FIR No. 145 of 2025, dated 27.8.2025, registered under Sections 351(ii) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’), and Section 3(1)(c)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities Act) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SC & ST Act’), with Police Station, Boileauganj, by surrendering themselves to the custody of the Court, on 29.8.2025.

¶13

According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in the present case.

¶14

3 2025:HHC:31837

¶15

According to the applicants, the present case is nothing, but a counter blast to the FIR, which was registered against the complainant, on 17.8.2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 332 (c) of BNS.

¶16

According to the applicants, they are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

¶17

As per the case of the applicants, the allegations levelled against them are false and have been levelled, just to harass them.

¶18

It is the further case of the applicants that

¶19

they have nothing to do with the commission of alleged offences.

¶20

As per the applicants, they are respectable persons of the society, as such, there are no chances of their fleeing away from justice.

¶21

The applicants have given certain undertakings, through their counsel, for which, they are

¶22

4 2025:HHC:31837

¶23

ready to abide by, in case, relief, as sought, is granted to them.

¶24

When, put to notice, the Police filed status report, disclosing therein that on 27.8.2025, a complaint was moved by the complainant (respondent No. 2), disclosing therein that on 16.8.2025, at about 10:25 p.m., one Innova vehicle bearing registration No. HP07D5400, being driven by its driver, came near his house, when the complainant, after having dinner, had come out for walk.

¶25

9.1 As per the complainant, the driver of the aforesaid Innova tried to crush him, under the same, due to which, he sustained internal injuries. His mobile phone is stated to have damaged and his silver kada was also crushed. On his screamings, his family members came out and took him from there.

¶26

9.2 According to the complainant, initially, he thought that the driver of the aforesaid vehicle was Parul (applicant in Cr. MP(M) No. 2112 of 2025). However, later on, he noticed that Mohit Sharma (applicant in Cr.

¶27

5 2025:HHC:31837

¶28

MP(M) No. 2110 of 2025) was climbing up the stairs of his house. When, the complainant inquired from applicant Mohit Sharma about this fact, he has started misbehaving with him, by denying the incident.

¶29

9.3 According to the complainant, applicant Mohit Sharma seemed to be under the influence of liquor. He has started abusing the complainant and pelting stones on his house while uttering the words “तुम दोकोड़ीकेकोलीहोऔरक्याकरलोगे”.

¶30

9.4 It is the further case of the complainant that not only this, applicant Mohit Sharma threatened him and also lodged the case against him. Thereafter, the complainant threw the silver kada towards him asking him to get the same repaired.

¶31

9.5 In addition to this, he has also levelled allegations, against the applicants that they used to play music on high volume and throw garbage in the backyard of the complainant. When, the complainant confronted the applicants about this fact, applicant

¶32

6 2025:HHC:31837

¶33

Mohit Sharma asked from him about the proof of said allegations.

¶34

9.6 On the basis of above facts, the complainant has requested that action be taken against the applicants, upon which, FIR was registered and police machinery swung into motion. Spot was visited, and at the instance of complainant, the spot map was prepared. The wearing apparels of the complainant were also taken into possession.

¶35

9.7 After perusing the said status report, interim relief was granted to the applicants, by releasing them on interim bail and the matter was adjourned for 5.9.2025.

¶36

9.8 On 5.9.2025, complainant also put

¶37

appearance and sought time to file objections. On that day, the Police has filed fresh status report, disclosing therein about the fact that on 17.8.2025, FIR No. 140 of 2025, was also got lodged by applicant Mohit Sharma, against the complainant herein. Applicant Mohit Sharma

¶38

7 2025:HHC:31837

¶39

has also allegedly recorded the incident, in his mobile

¶40

phone, which was taken into possession, on 30.8.2025.

¶41

9.9 On 31.8.2025, CCTV footage of the camera,

¶42

installed at the residence of applicant Mohit Sharma, was also taken into possession. The mobile phone and the downloaded videos, including the pen drive, were sent to SFSL, Junga, report of which is still awaited. During investigation, mobile phone of complainant Baldev, was also taken into possession.

¶43

9.10 As per the Police, on 27.5.2025, mother of the complainant, Shankri Devi, had also got lodged FIR No. 82 of 2025, dated 27.5.2025, registered under Sections 3(1)(f) of SC &ST Act and 3(5) of BNS.

¶44

Respondent No. 2 has also filed objections, by

¶45

reiterating the stand, as taken in the complaint and supported the act of his mother of lodging FIR No. 82 of 2025, dated 27.5.2025.

¶46

Apart from this, apprehensions have also been expressed that in case, the interim order is made absolute, the applicants will intimidate, influence and

¶47

8 2025:HHC:31837

¶48

pressurize the complainant and other witnesses, and the complainant will not be able to get justice.

¶49

Apart from this, a stand has been taken that in case, the applicants are released on bail, it will give a wrong signal to the society.

¶50

On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the applications.

¶51

From the stand, as taken by the parties, especially the fact that the mother of the complainantrespondent No. 2 had already lodged FIR No. 82 of 2025, dated 27.5.2025, and applicant Mohit Sharma had also lodged FIR No. 140 of 2025, dated 17.8.2025, against the complainant (respondent No. 2), it will be proved during the trial, as to which party was the aggressor, as both the parties have levelled the allegations, against each other.

¶52

Moreover, the applicants are permanent residents of District Shimla, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, they are ordered to be released on bail, they may not be available for trial.

¶53

9 2025:HHC:31837

¶54

The bail applications cannot be dismissed, as

¶55

a matter of punishment, as pre-trial punishment, is prohibited under the law, and the applicants are presumed to be innocent, till the conclusion of the trial. 17. Moreover, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants in judicial custody, as commencement and conclusion of trial, will take sufficient long time.

¶56

Considering all these facts, the interim orders dated 29.8.2025 passed in all the cases, are liable to be confirmed. Consequently, interim orders dated 29.8.2025, passed in all the cases, are made absolute. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:-

¶57

a) That the applicants shall join the investigation of the case, as and when called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law;

¶58

b) That the applicants shall not leave India, without prior permission of the Court.

¶59

c) That the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade

¶60

10 2025:HHC:31837

¶61

him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court.

¶62

d) That the applicants shall make themselves available for the purpose of investigation, if so required and regularly attend the trial Court, on each and every date of hearing, and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application.

¶63

Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall

¶64

not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the

¶65

case, as these observations, are confined, only to the disposal of the present bail applications.

¶66

It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application(s), in case, any of the bail conditions, is found to be violated by the applicant(s).

¶67

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶68

16.9.2025

¶69

Kalpana

Mohit Sharma v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Sharma v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Vs M/S Sai Motors and Another

Sudarshna Kumari Vs PNB Lambloo and Anr.

Karam Devi and Another Vs State of Hp

Anu Sharma Vs State of Hp

Krishan Kumar Vs State of Hp

Miss Pooja and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another