I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

09^TH OCTOBER, 2025

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO.1863 of 2025

Keshav ..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mani Kumar,

Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal,

Brief Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The Applicant-Keshav is in judicial custody for

the offence under Section 303(2), Section 317(2), Section 111 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in the First Information Report No.399 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Rudrapur, District

Udham Singh Nagar.

2. According to the First Information Report dated 05.08.2025, a Hero Splendor Plus motorcycle (Registration No.UK06AG-2595) of the informant was stolen on 07/08-07-2025. The said stolen motorcycles and other nine motorcycles were recovered from the possession of the present applicant and co-accused

persons.

3. Heard Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

4. Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate, submitted that the said motorcycles were not stolen by the applicant. The said motorcycles were not recovered from his possession. The said recovery is false. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Rajesh Kumar, the co-accused of similar role, has already been granted regular bail by this Court in First Bail Application No.1793 of 2025.

5. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. The Bail Application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant- Keshav 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:09.10.2025 Neha NEHA BISHT DDo26ps6cD e n .b B u o iN a 5 r g =A 0 = s t i . : 4 a i e t 8 N9 t Hc al . : a b2 N6 = E l I 2 l C G02 0H I u 0 yN o =d B H m A2 s, d F 06 5 i Co b BE ee g f . 1 = 1 O 6 = I 0 e n S c 0 4 H 1 r2 U e H 1 = . D 86 0 Id R5 G T 3 b3 9 8 Tb b D H 00 1 1 6 y O 1 80 9 9 C 3 b 91 N F E : 0 O 2 D, E e E U5 s 9 U 4 7 C H 9 t T : 4 5 R = 0 3 1 A T C 3 T 2 U3 2A f A B 7 b0 O T + R I 97 31T S 0 AF C9A f4 H 5 K0 U FC 8R ' T H0 3 BE T 3A 8 0 A 94 T 6K e ' 68 AN dH 9 77 2 RDa A7B 7 A 4, 0N 2 , K a 6F D 8 H 8E 0 , A 40 3 5 N F 8 29 D e F2 e , 3, 7 2 3 D 2 E