HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL 2nd Bail Application No. 222 of 2024 Deep Sharma ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant Deep Sharma seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 29 of 2021, State v. Deep Sharma, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 08 of 2021, under Section 304-B IPC, Police Station Mallital, District Nainital. 2. This is second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 26.04.2024. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was arrested on 28.02.2021; it is more than four years now; out of 33 witnesses, only 12 witnesses have been examined; there are less chances of the trial being concluded in near future. 5. Factual narrations as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant have not been disputed by the learned State Counsel. 6. Delay is one of the reasons for considering bail. Generally bail is denied until the witnesses are examined. But, here 2 is the case which pertains to 2021. Since then four years have completed and out of 33 witnesses, only 12 witnesses have been examined. 7. Having considered the nature of offence and the delay caused in the matter, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. The bail application is allowed. 9. 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. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 03.04.2025 Avneet/