I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

24^th SEPTEMBER, 2025

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 1703 of 2025

Abhishek Rajput ..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate &

Ms. Gyan Mati Kushwaha,

Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Himanshu Sain, Brief Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The applicant – Abhishek Rajput is in judicial

custody for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), Section 111 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.52 of 2025, registered at Police Station Transit Camp, District Udham

Singh Nagar.

2. Heard Mr. Vikas Anand, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for

the respondent.

3. According to the First Information Report dated 16.02.2025, a Yamaha Fazer motorcycle (Registration No.UK08AD8095) of the informant was stolen. The First Information Report was registered against unknown person. 4. As per the respondent, the said motorcycle, other nine motorcycles and one scooty were recovered from

the possession of the applicant and the co-accused persons.

Applicant was arrested.

5. Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate, for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The said motorcycles were not stolen by him. The said motorcycles were not recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery was planted. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, and, he is in judicial custody since

19.02.2025. Charge-sheet has already been filed.

6. Mr. Himanshu Sain, Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally.

7. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

9. The Bail Application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant – Abhishek Rajput be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 24.09.2025 Pant/