IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 780 of 2011. Date of decision: 30.9.2011. Inder Singh & anr. ….. Petitioners. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Mehar Chand, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S.Rana, Asstt. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). This is an application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., for releasing the petitioners on bail in FIR No.186 of 2011 dated 23.9.2011, registered at Police Station, Barmana, District Bilaspur, H.P., under sections 342, 341,324,504,506,34 IPC. The status report filed and the same has been perused. 2. It has been stated in the application that a false case has been registered against the petitioners, who are innocent. The petitioners are ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. No recovery is to be made from the petitioners. It has been stated in the application that petitioners have not moved similar bail application in any court Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… including Supreme Court of India. The bail application was filed on 26.9.2011. 3. The bail application has been opposed on the basis of status report. It has been stated that case has been registered on the basis of statement, under Section 154 Cr.P.C. of Partap Chand, who was given severe beatings by the petitioners with iron rod as well as fist and kick blows. The occurrence is of 22.9.2011. It has been stated in the status report dated 30.9.2011 that injured is still admitted in the hospital. It has been pointed out that petitioners had filed bail applications on 23.9.2011 in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, which were dismissed on 28.9.2011. The prayer has been made for dismissing the bail application. 4. I have heard both the sides and perused the police file. In the police file, there is a copy of common order dated 28.9.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge Bilaspur in Criminal B.A. No. 195 of 2011 and Criminal B.A. No. 196 of 2011. The perusal of common order dated 28.9.2011 reveals that Criminal B.A. No. 195 of 2011 was filed by petitioner No. 2 herein and Criminal B.A. No. 196 of 2011 by petitioner No. 1 herein. The Criminal BA Nos. 195 and 196 of 2011 were filed by the petitioners No. 2 and 1 herein on 23.9.2011 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing them on bail in FIR No. 186 of 2011, registered on 23.9.2011 at Police Station, Barmana. The petitioners during the pendency of Criminal B.A. Nos. 195 and 196 of 2011 filed the present bail application stating therein that they have not filed similar bail application in any court and obtained interim bail order dated 27.9.2011 from this court. …3… 5. The learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur has dismissed Criminal B.A. Nos. 195 and 196 of 2011 on 28.9.2011. The petitioners have concealed material facts from this court, rather they misrepresented the facts before this court and obtained interim bail order dated 27.9.2011. The petitioners are involved in the commission of serious offence. The injured is still admitted in the hospital. In view of seriousness of the case and the misconduct of petitioners of misrepresentation made in the present bail application by stating that they have not filed any other bail application in any court, whereas on the date of filing of present bail application, their bail applications, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., for releasing them on bail in FIR No. 186 of 2011 were pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, there is no merit in the petition, hence the same is dismissed. September 30, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.