IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. 101 of 2024 Sumit Kumar ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent With SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. 99 of 2024 Rahul Kumar ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent With SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. 103 of 2024 Himanshu ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. 102 of 2024 Kapil Kumar ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent Mr.Mukesh Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant in Second Bail Application Nos. 101/102/103 of 2024 and Mr. B.N. Maulekhi, learned counsel for the applicant in Second Bail Application No. 99 of

2024.

Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the victim (through video conferencing).

Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J (Oral)

The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the applicants, namely, Rahul Kumar, Sumit Kumar, Kapil Kumar, and Himanshu, who have been implicated in FIR No. 0031/2023 registered at Police Station Gopeshwar, District Chamoli, for offences under Sections 302, 120B, 201, and 34 IPC.

2. Since all four bail applications have arisen from the same FIR, i.e., FIR No. 31 of 2023, they are being considered and decided upon through this common order. For the sake of convenience, only the facts of Bail Application No. 101 of 2024 are being considered and discussed.

3. It is apt to mention at this stage that the first Bail Application No. 2767 of 2023, filed on behalf of the applicant, Sumit Kumar, was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.03.2024.

4. The applicants have been in judicial custody since 10.11.2023 in connection with FIR No. 0031/2023, registered under Sections 302, 120B, 201, and 34 of the IPC at Police Station Gopeshwar, District Chamoli.

5. The prosecution case, as per the FIR lodged by Smt. Jamna Panwar on 29.10.2023, is that her husband, Naveen Singh Panwar, an X-ray Technician at the District Hospital, Gopeshwar, had left for emergency duty on 24.10.2023 but did not return home. That she last spoke with her husband at 8:55 PM on 24.10.2023, during which he informed her that his colleagues, Darshan Barthwal and Sharad, were calling him from behind.On 25.10.2023 at 6:54 AM, she was informed that her husband was found unconscious with severe head injuries on the roof of the Employment Office, Gopeshwar. The deceased was initially treated at District Hospital Gopeshwar, referred to AIIMS Rishikesh, and subsequently admitted to Himalayan Hospital, Jolly Grant, where he succumbed to his injuries. Initially, an FIR was registered under Section 307 IPC against unknown persons, but during the course of the investigation, the case was altered to Sections 304, 120B, 201, and 34 IPC. Subsequently, after the death of the victim, Section 302 IPC was added.

6. It is also pertinent to mention at this stage that earlier, by order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court, a short-term bail was granted to the applicant, Sumit Kumar S/O Sunil Kumar, on medical grounds.

7. Heard Mr. Mukesh Rawat and Mr. B.N. Molakhi learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. S.C. Dumka learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand, and Mr. Lalit Sharma learned counsel for the victim (through video conference). The records were also perused.

8. The applicants have been implicated in the case as they were allegedly the last persons seen with the deceased.The prosecution contends that there is prima facie evidence of their involvement in the conspiracy leading to the unnatural death of the victim.

9. It has been alleged that the accused were present at a hotel near the Employment Office on the night of October 24, 2023. During this time, the deceased reportedly recorded a video of them, which allegedly led to an altercation. The prosecution contends that the recording provoked the accused, and this provocation ultimately led to the incident.

10. The applicants submit