No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1966 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Shivam Gulati, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The applicant – Dilip, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/ Case Crime No. 141 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 352 and 103(1) of BNS, registered at P.S.- Pathri, District Haridwar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged by the complainant on 04.03.2025, wherein, 21 persons have been named as accused. As per the contents of the FIR, the accused armed with wooden rods and sticks, entered into the house of the complainant and abused the entire family and started beating them with rod and sticks, due to which, complainant and other family members suffered injuries and son of the complainant namely Pramod succumbed to the injuries and died in the hospital. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that during investigation, statements of the injured witnesses were recorded and neither in the statements, nor in the complaint, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant; that there is major contradiction in the complaint as well as in the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 of BNSS regarding place of occurrence of the incident. It is further submitted that Nisha has videographed the whole incident in her mobile phone and even in that videography recording, applicant is not seen and that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025. 7. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that the offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has also filed the video-recording of the alleged incident, which was produced by the prosecution before the Trial Court. On 05.12.2025, State was directed to verify the same. On verification, learned State Counsel has admitted that, as per the video footage, applicant was not seen at the place of incidence. 10. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that chargesheet has been filed, but, the trial has yet not commenced; there are major contradictions in the FIR and statements of the injured victim regarding place of occurrence of the incident, furthermore, applicant is not seen in the video footage, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ( Alok Mah r a J.) 19.03.2026 Ujjwal