Dismissed¶50

Gurdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Anticipatory bail – Section 482 BNSS

Himachal Pradesh HC2 Sept 2025CRMPM/2132/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Himachal Pradesh High Court, Shimla (Virender Singh, Judge), 02.09.2025 — anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS refused; common dismissal of Cr.MP(M) Nos. 2130–2132 of 2025 (Dharam Pal, Satnam Singh, Gurdeep Singh v. State of H.P.) seeking bail upon arrest in FIR No. 256/2025, PS Nalagarh, Solan (Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 351(3) BNS; Section 118(1) BNS added), arising from a sword-and-danda attack on a father-son tea-kiosk duo at Chowkiwala the day after a pakora dispute; injuries simple; seriousness of offence and deterrent effect of grant weighed against the applicants.

What did the court decide?

The applicants are not able to make out a case for issuance of any direction under Section 482 of the BNSS; consequently, all three anticipatory bail applications are dismissed. ¶50

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Hp — Anticipatory Bail | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶50

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants, apprehending arrest in case FIR No. 256 of 2025 (Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan), are entitled to a direction under Section 482 BNSS to the Police/Investigating Officer to release them on bail in the event of their arrest.

¶12

Court's answer

The applicants are not able to make out a case for issuance of any direction under Section 482 of the BNSS; consequently, all three anticipatory bail applications are dismissed.

¶50

Ratio / Principle

The offence is serious: the crime was committed over a trivial matter (non-supply of pakoras demanded by Gurmail Singh), the father-son complainants were beaten cruelly and, despite not lodging an FIR earlier so as not to aggravate the issue, they were attacked the next day and inflicted with injuries; making the interim order absolute would encourage other persons to indulge in such activities and take the law into their hands.

¶47

Key takeaways

Any observations made in the order shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, being confined only to the disposal of the present applications.obiter¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Section 482 BNSS — refused. Common order disposing of Cr.MP(M) Nos. 2130–2132 of 2025 by which Dharam Pal, Satnam Singh and Gurdeep Singh, apprehending arrest in case FIR No. 256 of 2025, dated 01.08.2025 (Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan), registered under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2) and 351(3) BNS, sought a direction to release them on bail in the event of arrest. The FIR arose out of an alleged attack, the day after a trivial dispute over non-supply of pakoras at a tea kiosk at Chowkiwala, in which occupants of a black Scorpio without registration number assaulted complainant Yashbhav Rana and his father Bhupender Singh with a sword and dandas wrapped in barbed wire; injuries were opined simple, caused with sharp-edged and blunt weapons (Section 118(1) BNS added), final X-ray opinion pending. The applicants had joined investigation on 08.08.2025; a vehicle was produced by co-accused Vikram Chandel and a steel pipe and danda were recovered through Harvinder Singh @ Hunny; the status report disclosed resentment in society and did not mention the applicants' criminal history (the applicants stated two cases each stood registered against them). Holding that the manner of the attack spoke of the seriousness of the offence and that making the interim order absolute would encourage others to take the law into their hands, the Court found the applicants unable to make out a case for a Section 482 BNSS direction and dismissed the applications, confining its observations to the disposal and not to the merits.

¶1

2025:HHC:29870

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

Cr.MP(M) Nos.: 2130 to 2132 of 2025 Decided on : 02 nd September, 2025

¶4

1. Cr. MP (M) No. 2130 of 2025
Dharam Pal	…Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
2. Cr. MP (M) No. 2131 of 2025
Satnam Singh	…Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
3. Cr. MP (M) No. 2132 of 2025
Gurdeep Singh	…Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh,	Judge.

¶5

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶6

For the applicant : Applicants in person with Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate. Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General, assisted by ASI Jitender, Police Station Nalagrah.

¶7

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶8

¶9

2025:HHC:29870

¶10

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶11

All the above titled bail applications are being disposed of by this common order, as, the above named applicants, apprehending their arrest, in case FIR No.256 of 2025, dated 01.08.2025, registered, under Sections 109, 191 (2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), and 351 (3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’), with Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, have filed the present applications, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’).

¶12

By way of the present applications, indulgence of this Court has been sought to direct the Police/ Investigating Officer of Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., to release them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in the above noted FIR.

¶13

According to the applicants, the above stated FIR, has been registered against them, due to animosity and with ulterior motive.

¶14

As per the applicants, a simple scuffle took place between other coaccused and no injury was caused

¶15

3 2025:HHC:29870

¶16

to the victim. The applicants have termed all the allegations, levelled against them, as false.

¶17

Apart from the present case, two cases, against each applicants are stated to have been registered.

¶18

Apart from this, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicants, for which, the applicants are ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued, under Section 482 BNSS.

¶19

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

¶20

When put to notice, the police has filed the status report on 07.08.2025, disclosing therein, that on 01.08.2025, from CHC Nalagarh, a telephonic information was received in Police Station Nalagarh, about the fact that a scuffle had taken place at Chowkiwala and injured were taken to CHC Nalagarh.

¶21

8.1. Thereafter, HC Nirmal Singh along with C. Ajmat Ali, reached at CHC Nalagarh, where Yashbhav and Bhupender Singh were found in injured condition. The I.O. filled the requisite form, for conducting their MLCs,

¶22

¶23

2025:HHC:29870

¶24

upon which, the Medical Officer has opined that Xray and CT scan of the injured are required to be conducted.

¶25

8.2. Thereafter, complainant Yashbhav Rana, made a statement under Section 173 of BNSS, mentioning therein that he is resident of village Saned, Post Office Bhatian, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, and he along with his father Bhupender Singh, is running a tea kiosk near Truck Union Chowkiwala besides Dindora Hotel.

¶26

8.3. On 31.07.2025, at about 1.302.00 p.m., Gurmel Singh, who is running a finance office, in front of their kiosk, directed the father of the complainant to provide ‘ Pakora’ in his shop, however, the father of the complainant was busy with the customers and in the process, he took half an hour. Thereafter, Gurmel Singh again, telephonically directed him to do so, upon which, he took Pakora to his shop. Thereafter, 56 persons, who were present there, directed him to take back the pakoras and started abusing him. 23 persons had inflicted danda blows to the complainant and his father.

¶27

8.4. Thereafter, Gurmel Singh came and took away them from there and proclaimed that Bhupender Singh is

¶28

5 2025:HHC:29870

¶29

just like his brother and Yashbhav is like his son. Thereafter, he made them to compromise, upon which, they thought that they are running their business, as such, they should not indulge in such type of dispute. Out of the said persons, complainant has identified two persons, as Hunny son of Bansi Ram and Shankri son of Kewal Singh. So far as other persons are concerned, the complainant does not know them.

¶30

8.5. It is the further case of the police that on 1.08.2025, at about 2.00 p.m., when he and his father was working, then, a black coloured Scorpio reached near their shop, registration number was not affixed on it and few persons alightened down from the vehicle and due to the grudge nourished by them, on account of the incident having been taken place on the previous day, in order to kill him and his father, attacked them, with sword and dandas having barbed wire rolled on it. After beating them and on seeing that blood started oozing out from their wounds, they had fled away from there and threatened to finish them, in case, they get the opportunity.

¶31

¶32

2025:HHC:29870

¶33

8.6. On the basis of the above facts, a request has been made to take action against them, upon which, the police registered the FIR and the criminal machinery swung into motion.

¶34

During investigation, spot was visited and spot map was prepared. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. On the basis of the CCTV footage, it has been pleaded, in the status report, that the accused persons have inflicted a number of blows on the head of the father of the complainant and the complainant was also beaten, when he had tried to save him.

¶35

It has also been mentioned in the FIR that on 08.08.2025, the applicants have joined the investigation and on 09.08.2025, opinion of the Medical Officer, CHC Nalagarh, on the MLCs of complainant Yashbhav and injured Bhupender Singh was obtained. The injuries were declared to be caused with sharp edged weapon and simple in nature. Injuries were stated to be caused with blunt weapon, upon which, Section 118(1) of BNS was added. However, final opinion on Xray report is yet to be obtained, as the Radiologist, ZH Solan is on leave.

¶36

7 2025:HHC:29870

¶37

On 10.08.2025, accused Vikram Chandel

¶38

produced the vehicle used in the crime in question, which was taken into possession. It is the further case that he is trying to mislead the police regarding the involvement of the other accused. Similarly, they are misleading about the weapon of offence.

¶39

On the basis of the statement of the witnesses, involvement of Hunny @ Harvinder, Shankari @ Vikram Chandel, cousin brother of Shankari Prabhu @ Prabhjot Fauzi, Dharampal, Deepu, was found.

¶40

On 11.08.2025, accused Harvinder Singh @ Hunny, got recovered the steel pipe and danda, which were taken into possession.

¶41

It is the further case of the police that due to the act of the accused persons, there is lot of resentment in the society. Weapons of offence and the vehicle involved in the crime in question are yet to be recovered.

¶42

Criminal history of the applicants have not been mentioned in the status report.

¶43

On the basis of the seriousness of the offences, a prayer has been made to dismiss the applications.

¶44

¶45

2025:HHC:29870

¶46

Heard.

¶47

The seriousness of the offence is a factor to accept or reject the application, filed, under Section 482 of the BNS. The manner, in which, the crime, in question, has been committed on account of trivial matter, i.e., non supply of Pakora, on the demand of Gurmail Singh, speaks about the cruel manner, in which, father son duo was beaten by the accused persons. Gurmail Singh tried to pacify the parties, but, despite giving beatings to the complainant party, by the assailants (accused persons), the complainant party had thought it proper, not to aggravate the issue by lodging the FIR, as, according to them, they are businessmen and do not want to indulge themselves in such type of scuffle, whereas, as per the allegations, applicants, on the next day, had gone, along with their companions, and attacked the complainant and his father and inflicted injuries on their persons. This also speaks voluminously about the seriousness of the offence and in case the interim order is made absolute, it will encourage other persons to indulge in such type of activities and to take law in their hand.

¶48

9 2025:HHC:29870

¶49

The cumulative effect of the above discussion is

¶50

that the applicants are not able to make out a case for issuance of any direction under Section 482 of the BNSS, as such, the present applications are dismissed.

¶51

Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined,

¶52

only, to the disposal of the present application.

¶53

( Virender Singh ) Judge

¶54

September 02, 2025 (ps)

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Registration of case FIR No. 256 of 2025, dated 01.08.2025, under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan; the applicants apprehend arrest in this FIR and seek anticipatory bail.¶11
Prior proceeding
On notice, police filed a status report on 07.08.2025 disclosing that on 01.08.2025 telephonic information was received from CHC Nalagarh that a scuffle had taken place at Chowkiwala and injured were taken to CHC Nalagarh.¶20
Prior proceeding
Complainant Yashbhav Rana made a statement under Section 173 BNSS describing the 31.07.2025 dispute over supply of pakoras and danda blows, identifying Hunny son of Bansi Ram and Shankri son of Kewal Singh among the assailants.¶25
Prior proceeding
As per the status report, on 01.08.2025 at about 2.00 p.m. persons alighting from a black Scorpio without a registration number, nursing grudge of the previous day's incident, attacked the complainant and his father in order to kill them.¶30
Prior proceeding
During investigation the spot was visited, spot map prepared and witness statements recorded; on CCTV footage the accused persons were shown inflicting a number of blows on the head of the complainant's father, who was also beaten when trying to save him.¶34
Prior proceeding
The applicants joined the investigation on 08.08.2025.¶35
Prior proceeding
On 09.08.2025 the Medical Officer's opinion on the MLCs of complainant Yashbhav and injured Bhupender Singh was obtained: injuries caused with sharp edged weapon and simple in nature; blunt-weapon injuries led to addition of Section 118(1) BNS; final opinion on X-ray report pending as the Radiologist, ZH Solan was on leave.¶35
Prior proceeding
On 10.08.2025 co-accused Vikram Chandel produced the vehicle used in the crime, which was taken into possession; he was alleged to be misleading the police about the involvement of other accused and about the weapon of offence.¶37
Prior proceeding
On the basis of witness statements, involvement of Hunny @ Harvinder, Shankari @ Vikram Chandel, cousin brother of Shankari Prabhu @ Prabhjot Fauzi, Dharampal and Deepu was found.¶39
Prior proceeding
On 11.08.2025 accused Harvinder Singh @ Hunny got recovered the steel pipe and danda, which were taken into possession.¶40
Prior proceeding
Status report stated that due to the act of the accused persons there was lot of resentment in society.¶41
Prior proceeding
Criminal history of the applicants was not mentioned in the status report (the applicants themselves had stated that two cases each were registered against them apart from the present case).¶42

Gurdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Alam Chand Vs Tilak Raj Palta

Kali Dass Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Ranjana Rawat Vs State of Hp

Parveen Mayer Vs Jitender Singh

Kulveer Vs State of Hp