2025:UHC:10127 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 8 7 4 of 2 0 2 5 Hon 'ble Rak esh Th apliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant Saleem, S/ o Nafees Ahmad is praying for bail in relation to FIR No. 187 of 2024, registered at P.S. Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 103 read with Section 03(5), 352 of BNS 2023. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent which is evident from the fact that after completion of the investigation no charge sheet was filed against the present applicant and in fact, he was exonerated. He submits that the applicant has been summoned to face the trial on an application moved under Section 319 Cr.P.C. He further submits that on an application under Section 319 in total three persons were summoned, one is the present applicant other one is his wife Ms. Nazra and one more lady Ms. Nazma. 5. He also pointed out that one of the co- accused who was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C., challenged the order in a criminal revision No. 81 of 2025 and the Coordinate Bench of this Court stayed the order passed by the trial court dated 20.01.2025 qua the revisionist. 6. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey submits that order dated 20.01.2025 is still in operation. Apart from this he submits that one another co-accused who is in fact is the wife of the present applicant is already enlarged on bail by this Court on 11.08.2025 in Bail Application No. 860 of 2025. 7. On the other side, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, 2025:UHC:10127 learned Addl. Advocate General have not disputed this fact that during investigation the applicant and two other co-accused persons were exonerated, however, all of them were summoned on an application under Section 319Cr.P.C, by the trial court. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that during investigation no material was found against the applicant, however, the applicant was summoned by the trial court on an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C.,this Court is of the view since the trial court has summoned the applicant under Section 319 Cr.P.C., and the other co-accused the wife of the present applicant is already enlarged on bail and in other revision filed by another co-accused the order passed on an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is already stayed, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant “Saleem” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that grant of bail to the present applicant will not be treated as a precedent in respect of the other co-accused. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 14.11.2025 Nahid 2025:UHC:10127