Disposed¶9

Aman Kumar v. State of Hp

Bail – Cr.MP(M)

Himachal Pradesh HC16 Jul 2026CRMPM/1203/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Himachal Pradesh High Court, Shimla; Cr.MP(M) No.1203 of 2026; decided 16.07.2026 by Sandep Sharma... correction: Sandeep Sharma, J. Bail petition under POCSO Act S.6 r/w S.5(m) and IPC Ss.363, 376/376AB, 506; undertrial in custody since 08.06.2024; 21/23 witnesses examined; petition withdrawn with liberty to refile; expeditious-trial direction with 31.08.2026 deadline; bail to be reconsidered if trial not concluded.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the bail petition with liberty to file afresh at an appropriate stage; trial court expected to conclude the trial preferably on or before 31.08.2026, failing which the bail prayer is to be considered by this Court. ¶9

Aman Kumar Vs State of Hp — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an undertrial accused of heinous crime punishable under Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act and Sections 363, 376/376AB and 506 IPC, should be granted bail at this stage while the trial is nearing completion.

¶8

Court's answer

The Court was not persuaded to consider the prayer for grant of bail at this stage, since the trial is nearing completion and the petitioner is accused of heinous crime punishable under Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act and Sections 363, 376/376AB and 506 IPC.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the present petition at this stage with liberty to file afresh at an appropriate stage, if required and desired; ordered accordingly.

¶9

Key takeaways

Taking note that the bail-petitioner has been behind bars since 08.06.2024 and the trial is nearing completion, the Court expressed its hope and trust that the Court below would make all out efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably on or before 31.08.2026, failing which the Court shall be constrained to consider the petitioner's prayer for bail; the learned Additional Advocate General undertook to render proper assistance to enable conclusion of the trial, and the Registry was directed to apprise the Court below of this order.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Cr.MP(M) — petitioner, an undertrial in custody since 08.06.2024, accused of heinous crime punishable under Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act and Sections 363, 376/376AB and 506 IPC; 21 of 23 prosecution witnesses examined and trial nearing completion; Court not persuaded to consider bail at this stage; petition permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file afresh at appropriate stage; Court below expected to conclude trial expeditiously, preferably on or before 31.08.2026, failing which bail prayer to be considered; Additional Advocate General undertook assistance to prosecution; Registry directed to apprise Court below.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Cr.MP(M) No.1203 of 2026 Date of Decision: 16.07.2026

¶3

______________________ Aman Kumar State of Himachal Pra	_______________________________________________ ……...Petitioner Versus desh …....Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S Whether approved for	andeep Sharma, Judge. reporting?
For the Petitioner:	Mr. Ishaan Kashyap, Advocate.
For the Respondent:	Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State.
________________________	HC Inderjeet Singh, No.37, Police Station Majra, District Sirmaur, present along with record. ___________________________________________________

¶4

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶5

Pursuant to order dated 07.07.2026, respondent-State has filed status report and HC Inderjeet Singh, No.37, Police Station Majra, District Sirmaur, is present along with record. Close scrutiny of status report/record made available to this Court reveals that 21 prosecution witnesses out of 23 have been examined and for recording the statement of remaining witnesses, Court below has fixed the matter for tomorrow, i.e. 17.07.2026. Since trial is nearing completion, coupled with the fact that petitioner is accused of heinous crime punishable under Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act and Sections 363, 376/376AB

¶6

¶7

and 506 of IPC, this Court is not persuaded to consider the prayer made

¶8

on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail at this stage.

¶9

Faced with aforesaid situation, learned counsel representing the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition at this stage with liberty to file afresh, at appropriate stage, if required and desired. Ordered accordingly.

¶10

Having taken note of the fact that bail-petitioner is behind bars since 08.06.2024 and trial is nearing completion, this Court hopes and trusts that the Court below would make all out efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably, on or before 31.08.2026, failing which this Court shall be constrained to consider prayer made by the petitioner for bail. Learned Additional Advocate General undertakes to render proper assistance on behalf of the prosecution, enabling the Court below to conclude the trial in terms of instant order passed by this Court. Needless to say, this Court on judicial as well as administrative sides, has been repeatedly advising the Courts below to conclude the trial of undertrials on topmost priority so that their freedom is not curtailed for an indefinite period. Registry is directed to apprise the Court below with regard to passing of the instant order.

¶11

July 16, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), Rajeev Raturi Judge

Aman Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Kumar v. State of Hp

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

Shaurya Vs State of Hp and Another

Bhagirath Vs Yoginder Sharma

Bhagirath Vs Yoginder Sharma

Kewal Singh Negi Vs Baldev Singh Shandil

Rakesh Arora and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Sandeep@Jonti Vs State