HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.2259 of 2024 Piyush Jatt @ Piyush Baliyan ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, AGA for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No.771 of 2024, under Sections 109, 125, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 353 and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/25, 1(B)(a) Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is not named in the FIR; even the injured has not named; the applicant has not committed any offence; he has no criminal history. 4. Learned State Counsel admits that applicant is not named in the FIR and he has not been named by the injured. But, he would submit that the son of the 2 informant could identify the applicant. He is an eye- witness also and he has stated about it. 5. The Court wanted to know from the learned State Counsel that if the incident was witnessed by the son of the informant why the applicant was not named in the FIR. There is no response to it. 6. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. The bail application is allowed. 8. 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) 02.01.2025 Ravi