2025:UHC:8756 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1594/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Geeta Sajwan, (through V.C.) learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant “Jasveer, son of late Om Prakash” is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 10.02.2024 bearing FIR No. 32 of 2024, Police Station – Sahaspur, District – Dehradun wherein present applicant, his brother Jaiprakash and mother Rupa Devi were implicated for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant married with the deceased on 19.06.2022 and deceased was suffering from fits and later on, she passed away. She argued that there is inordinate delay in registering the FIR since the incident took place on 26.10.2023 and FIR was registered on 10.02.2024. She further argued that post mortem was conducted on 27.10.2023 and as per post mortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained. She further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation and applicant is languishing in jail since 04.12.2024 and furthermore, charges have already been framed and trial has commenced. 5. On the other side, Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA have not disputed this fact that in the post mortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained and charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation and applicant is languishing in jail since 04.12.2024. Mr. Sharma, also pointed out that viscera was sent for the chemical examination and as per viscera report, deceased died due to consumption of Sulphas. 6. Be that as it may, admittedly, in the present 2025:UHC:8756 case, charge-sheet has already been filed and applicant is languishing in jail since 04.12.2024 and charges have already been framed and trial has commenced, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant “Jasveer, son of late Om Prakash” be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 26.09.2025 SKS 2025:UHC:8756