PAWAN KUMAR(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP(Not Applicable) — CRMPM/422/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010126982026

Filing Number

CRMPM/1803/2026

Filing Date

16-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRMPM/422/2026

Registration Date

19-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PAWAN KUMAR(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh granted bail to petitioner Pawan Kumar in a criminal case registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court found that custodial interrogation was unnecessary since the petitioner was cooperating with the investigating agency and nothing required recovery from him. The court emphasized that personal liberty is paramount, the accused enjoys presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and bail is the norm while detention is the exception, subject to conditions including regular appearance in court and non-tampering with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMPM/422/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh granted bail to petitioner Pawan Kumar in a criminal case registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court found that custodial interrogation was unnecessary since the petitioner was cooperating with the investigating agency and nothing required recovery from him. The court emphasized that personal liberty is paramount, the accused enjoys presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and bail is the norm while detention is the exception, subject to conditions including regular appearance in court and non-tampering with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case