Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

No.

and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

BA1 No. 1697 of 2025

Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Ms. Manju Bahuguna, learned

counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned A.G.A. for

the State.

3. Present applicant Himanshu, S/o Rampal is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 21.04.2025, bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 0109 of 2025, registered at P.S. Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar wherein three persons namely Dharmendra, his wife Archana and Himansu were implicated along with some unknown person for the offences punishable under Section 109, 351 (2) of

Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023.

4. On completion of the investigation, the present applicant and other co accused have been chargesheeted for the offences punishable under Section 109, 351 (2), 190, 191 (3) of Bhartiya

Nyay Sanhita 2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and furthermore, the other co-accused Dharmendra has already been enlarged on bail and she further argued that charge sheet has already been filed as such, there is no need of custodial

interrogation of the applicant.

6. She further argued that the role as assigned to the present applicant is almost identical to the other co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail. She further argued that there is 17 hours

delay in lodging the FIR.

7. On the other side, Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State, have not disputed this fact that the charge

sheet has already been filed and the other co-accused has already been granted bail.

8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the other co-accused has already enlarged on bail, and charge sheet has already been filed, and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 24.04.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.

9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant “Himanshu” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

16.09.2025 Nahid