HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.2538 of 2024 Jasveer Singh alias Jassi Kachura ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. S.,K. Mandal, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. With First Bail Application No.209 of 2025 Manmohan Singh ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. R.S. Sammal and Ms. Sarita Bisht, Advocates for the applicant. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. With First Bail Application No.2 of 2025 Balram Vishwas ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Ms. Medha Pande, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. With First Bail Application No.318 of 2025 Satendra Singh ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. With First Bail Application No.537 of 2025 Gurpreet Singha alias Gopi Badaich ….....Applicant Versus 2 State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the applicant appeared through video conferencing. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Since all these bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are being heard together and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants Jasveer Singh alias Jassi Kachura, Manmohan Singh, Balram Vishwas, Satendra Singh and Gurpreet Singha alias Gopi Badaich are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.232 of 2024, dated 13.10.2024, under Sections 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. According to the FIR, on 12.10.2024, at about 12:30 in the midnight, the applicants attacked the nephew of the informant Jasandeep Singh and his colleagues; opened fire and they tried to crush the injured Jasandeep by riding a vehicle over him. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that it is a cross case; the applicant Balram Vishwas and others sustained injuries and the applicant Balram Vishwas had firearm injuries also; the incident is of mid-night; there is no source of light shown at the place of incident. 3 6. Learned State counsel would submit that Jasandeep Singh, Rakhbir Singh Virk and Sahab Singh alias Saabi sustained injuries. Rakhbir Singh Virk and Sahab Singh alias Saabi sustained firearm injuries; they had pallets; the injuries of Rakhbir Singh Virk were grievous. She would submit that, in fact, in the cross FIR, the injured of the instant case have been identified, therefore, in the same manner the applicants could be identified by the informant and other injured. 7. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this stage is to be avoided. To the extent of appreciating the controversy the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation made at this stage shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the case. 8. Admittedly, it is a cross-case. One of the injured Balram Vishwas had also sustained pallet injury on his chest. How is it received, there is nothing shown about it. 9. 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. 10. The bail applications are allowed. 11. Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond 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.) 05.04.2025 Sanjay