2025:UHC:9069 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 13TH OCTOBER, 2025 FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1820 of 2025 Ritik ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate through video conferencing. Counsel for the Respondent : Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned Deputy A.G. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The Applicant- Ritik is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 in Case Crime No. 307 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar. 2. According to the First Information Report dated 29.08.2025, the police saw two persons coming on a motorcycle. The police signaled them to stop. They fired at the police and ran away on motorcycle. One co-accused Badal was arrested by the police, while 1 2025:UHC:9069 one person managed to escape from the spot. Badal, the co-accused, told the police that Ritik (applicant) was with him, who fled from the spot. 3. Heard Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned Deputy A.G. for the respondent. 4. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate, contended that the applicant was not present on the spot. He has been implicated by the co-accused. Applicant has never been convicted. He is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. 5. Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned Deputy A.G, has opposed the bail application. 6. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep 2 2025:UHC:9069 the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 8. The Bail Application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Ritik 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. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt:13.10.2025 Nahid 3