Himachal Pradesh High Court
CRMPM/1771/2026 of MOHAMMAD SHARIF Vs STATE OF HP on 23 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1771 of 2026 Date of Decision: 23.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Mohammad Sharif …….Petitioner Versus State of HP … Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No.1771 of 2026 Date of Decision: 23.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Mohammad Sharif
…….Petitioner
Versus
State of HP
… Respondent
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner
: Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General.
ASI Pradeep Kumar, PS Dharampur, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, present in person along with record.
_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Bail petitioner namely Mohammad Sharif, who is behind bars since 12.03.2026, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 38/2026 dated 06.02.2026 under Sections 331(4), 305 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, registered at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Pursuant to directions issued by this Court, respondent- State has filed status report and ASI Pradeep Kumar has come present with record. Record perused and returned.
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
3. Close scrutiny of the record/status report reveals that though petitioner is a hardened criminal and prior to lodging of the FIR, as detailed hereinabove, 18 cases of theft stand registered against him, but yet despite his having been granted bail in other cases, as detailed in the status report, petitioner has not mended his ways and as such, this Court is not persuaded to consider the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail because in that event, there is every likelihood that he will indulge in these activities again. Moreover, this Court finds that trial has commenced and Court below has posted the matter on 15.10.2026 for framing of charge.
4. Faced with the aforesaid situation, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file afresh at appropriate stage. Ordered accordingly.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge September 23, 2026 (sunil)