Twelve petitioners filed connected pre-arrest bail petitions before the Himachal Pradesh High Court arising out of FIR No. 88 of 2026 registered at Police Station Majra, District Sirmour, for offences under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3(1)(r) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioners claimed they were falsely implicated after a land dispute in which possession had been lawfully delivered to them, and that the informant party was the aggressor; they also noted that a cross-FIR (No. 87 of 2026) had been registered against the informant. The State and the informant opposed bail, alleging that the petitioners had hurled caste-based abuses, caused grievous injuries using weapons including a kirpan, iron rod, and gandasi, threatened the informant party to compel a compromise, and subsequently burnt the informant's tractor (leading to FIR No. 91 of 2026). The court considered the settled legal parameters for bail as laid down by the Supreme Court in Pinki v. State of U.P. (2025) 7 SCC 314, Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. High Court of A.P. (1978) 1 SCC 240, and Prahlad Singh Bhati v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2001) 4 SCC 280, including the nature of the charge, severity of punishment, likelihood of witness tampering, and the conduct of the accused. The judgment text as provided ends mid-analysis, so the final order is not captured in the supplied text.