2025:UHC:8309 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1604 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Rajveer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant through V.C. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant Firoz S/o Fayaz is praying for bail in relation to First Information Report dated 08.02.2024 bearing FIR No. 0061 of 2024 registered at P.S. Jhabrera District Haridwar, which was lodged against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. In this FIR, on completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 201 of IPC against three persons namely Yashpal Jatin and the present applicant. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the amount which was withdrawn belongs to the mother of the complainant, who died three months back from the date of withdrawal of the amount. He submits that the mother of the complainant was provided ATM card, and the ATM card was linked with the mobile number of the co-accused Yashpal. He submits that the present applicant has no concern with regard to the withdrawal of the amount. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.04.2025 and on completion of investigation now the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, at this juncture there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. He also submits that as per the banking system the amount can be withdrawn digitally, operated by the biometric system. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and two other co-accused namely Jatin Kumar and Yashpal have already been granted bail. He further argued that as per the prosecution Yashpal is the main accused, who has already been granted bail and the applicant 2025:UHC:8309 has no previous criminal history. 6. On the other side, learned A.G.A. have not disputed this fact that the other two co-accused have already been enlarged on bail including the main accused Yashpal and the role of the applicant is identical to the other co-accused Jatin Kumar and furthermore the applicant have no previous criminal history and the chargesheet has already been filed. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the other two co-accused have already been enlarged on bail and the applicant has no previous criminal history and the chargesheet has already been filed, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant ‘Firoz’ 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.) 18.09.2025 PR 2025:UHC:8309