Sonu vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.799 of 2021, registered at police station Kotwali Haridwar, District Haridwar under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

As per the case of the prosecution, present applicant along with the co-accused persons had committed the murder of the son of the informant. First Information Report was registered on 31.10.2021. Inquest proceedings and post-mortem of the dead body of the deceased were conducted.

Mr. H.C. Pathak, Advocate, contended that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Informant is not an eye witness of the said incident. As per prosecution case, Smt. Amana (PW2) and Manoj Sharma (PW3) are eye witnesses. However, they did not support the case of the prosecution in their cross examinations. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, and, he is in custody since 01.11.2021.

On the other hand, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A., has opposed the bail application. However, he has conceded that eye witnesses Smt. Amana (PW2) and Manoj Sharma (PW3) have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason 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 Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Sonu, 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.