No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA2 No. 320 of 2024 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Prem Prakash Bhatt, learned legal-aid-counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned D.A.G. for the State. 3. The applicant – Ranu, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 26 of 2022, under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC, registered at P.S.- Pantnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. In this case, FIR was lodged by the wife of the deceased on 31.01.2022, wherein, she has made a complaint that the accused and the deceased (her husband) were together on the night of 28.01.2022 and on the next day i.e. on 29.01.2022, she received information from the Police Station that body of her husband has been found near Sector 06, Maini Company, SIIDCUL, Pantnagar, Udham Singh Nagar and she has apprehension that applicant has killed her husband. After investigation, chargesheet has been filed and as many as 27 witnesses have been examined. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no eye-witness to the incident and applicant has falsely been implicated in the case; that applicant has only been apprehended and made accused on the basis of CCTV footage of the factory from where the nearby auto and body of the deceased was recovered; that in the CCTV footage, neither the number of auto is visible, nor, the person who has parked the auto is visible; that the applicant is in jail since 04.02.2022; that there is a delay of three days in lodging the FIR, which has not been explained by the complainant, and, that out of 22 prosecution witnesses, only 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future. 7. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that this is a serious and heinous offence; that, prima facie, there are sufficient evidences to prove that applicant is involved in the crime. 8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. 10. 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. (Alok Mahra J.) 22.08.2025 Ujjwal