Arjinder Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This is the Second Bail Application.

The First Bail Application was dismissed as withdrawn on 14.01.2025 granting liberty to the applicant to file a fresh bail application.

Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 109, 351(3), 115(2), 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 30 of the Arm s Act, 1959.

As per the prosecution, the present applicant and co-accused Vim al came to the informant’s house with JCB machine at about 10: 30 p.m. on 01.11.2024. They were breaking the goods of the inform ant’s house. They were forbidden. On this, the present applicant fired three shots on the inform ant’s husband Shahnawaz, due to which he was injured. A pistol was recovered from the possession of the present applicant during the course of the investigation.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel with Ms. Divya Jain, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA assisted by Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the State.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was not present on the spot. The alleged JCB machine has not been recovered by the Investigating Officer. As per allegation, incident took place outside the house of the informant, whereas the site plan is entirely of some other place. The said pistol was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. Copy of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory has not been filed. The alleged injured was discharged from the hospital on 03.11.2024. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He is a perm anent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, applicant is in custody since 02.11.2024.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, appearing for the State, has submitted on instruction that the injured was discharged from the hospital on 03.11.2024, and, the applicant has no criminal history.

The object of keeping the accused in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. There is nothing on record to indicate that the applicant had earlier been involved in any unacceptable activities.

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 merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The Second Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Arjinder Singh 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 on the following conditions: -

i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.