HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.2243 of 2024 Titu @ Gurcharan Singh ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Kaushal Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, AGA for the State. With First Bail Application No.2298 of 2024 Sahab Singh ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, AGA for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Both these bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are decided by this common order. 2. Applicants Titu @ Gurcharan Singh and Sahab Singh are in judicial custody in FIR No.148 of 2024, under 109, 115(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 352 & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that it is a matrimonial discord. As per FIR, informant’s in-laws did mar-peet with him and caused the injuries whereas in the cross FIR, the allegations are against other side also. 5. It is argued that no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicant for causing any specific injuries. There are barred allegations. 6. Learned State Counsel admits that it is a dispute which has arisen from matrimonial discord. He admits that it is case of cross FIR. He also admits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants that they had caused any specific injuries on any of the injured. 7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail. 8. Both these bail applications are allowed. 9. Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 02.01.2025 Ravi