2025:UHC:11579 I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 2 4 TH DECEMBER, 2 0 2 5 FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 2 4 7 2 of 2 0 2 5 Deepak ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate (through video conferencing) Counsel for the Respondent : Mrs. Sweta Badola Dobhal, Advocate Hon ’ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a,J. The applicant is in judicial custody for the offence under Sections 309 (4), 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 in Case Crime No.1070 of 2025, registered at Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar. 2 . According to the respondent, on 03.11.2025, two unknown persons beat the informant and snatched his mobile and Rs.1000/ -. FIR was registered on 04.11.2025. The said mobile phone, Rs.500/ - and a knife were recovered from the possession of the applicant. 3 . Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for 1 2025:UHC:11579 the applicant and Mrs. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the respondent. 4 . Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate submitted that the applicant was not involved in the said offence. Nothing was recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery is false. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. The said offences are triable by Magistrate. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he is in custody since 05.11.2025. 5 . Mrs. Sweta Badola Dobhal, Brief Holder has opposed the bail application orally. 6 . Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 7 . Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, 2 2025:UHC:11579 therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 8 . The Bail Application is allowed. 9 . Let the applicant-Deepak be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Date: 24.12.2025 JKJ/ Pant 3