2025:UHC:10376 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1678/2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Piyush Sammal along with Ms. Sarita Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pratiroop Pande along with Mr. Devender Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. A delay condonation application along with an affidavit has been filed, praying that the delay in filing the counter affidavit be condoned. The cause shown is found sufficient. The delay in filing the counter affidavit is hereby condoned. The delay condonation application is allowed. Counter affidavit is taken on record. 4. Applicant-Arjun Kumar, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 79 of 2025, under Sections 117, 102 & 105 of B.N.S. registered at Police Station Tanakpur, District Champawat has sought his release on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Initially, an F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant alleging that a dispute had arisen among Arjun@Banna, Sandeep, Deepanshu Pande and Rahul, all belonging to one Hayat Singh, at the NH within Village Bastia. It is alleged that the father of the complainant, namely Ganga Singh, approached the place of occurrence merely to intervene in the matter. Subsequently, he was attacked with brick- bats and rods. He fell on the road and, believing him to be dead, the assailants fled from the spot. It is further alleged that 2025:UHC:10376 the present applicant, Arjun, inflicted a grievous injury on the head of Ganga Singh with a stone, causing bleeding from his ear and nose. The injured was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, and thereafter referred to a higher centre where he underwent surgery. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case; that, there is a delay in lodging the F.I.R., the alleged incident occurred 21.07.2025, whereas the F.I.R. was filed on 26.07.2025 by the son of the injured, with an unexplained delay of more than five days; that, the injury sustained by the injured (since deceased) accidentally and not due to any act of the applicant; that the allegation of assault with a stone is incorrect; that, as per the F.I.R., the injury was initially described as simple in nature; that there is no evidence to show that the applicant caused the injury, nor is there any independent ocular testimony against him; that Ganga Singh died during treatment on 23.07.2025, which may have occurred due to medical negligence. 8. He would further submit that the co- accused named in the F.I.R. have already been exonerated by the trial court; that there is no direct or independent evidence to establish that the applicant inflicted any injury on the deceased; that the applicant is a permanent resident of District Champawat and there is no likelihood of his absconding; and that the applicant's bail application was earlier rejected by the court below vide order dated 29.08.2025. Hence, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Per contra, learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application, submitting that there is direct 2025:UHC:10376 evidence against the applicant and that the eyewitnesses have supported the prosecution version without any material contradiction. However, he fairly concedes 2025 UHC that the co-accused named in the F.I.R. have been exonerated by the trial court; that, the F.I.R. has been lodged with delay; and that the court below had rejected the applicant's bail application vide order dated 29.08.2025. 10. Having submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court notes the unexplained delay of more than five days in lodging the F.I.R. and the fact that the co-accused have already been exonerated by the trial court. In these circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of bail. 11. Accordingly, the 1st bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. [ (Alok Mahra, J.) 20.11.2025 Mamta 2025:UHC:10376