2025:UHC:10830 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 BAI No.2079 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant Sachin Kumar, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/ FIR No. 114 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 191(2), 351(3) & 352 of BNS, registered at P.S. Pantnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. As per the prosecution story, an FIR was lodged on 27.06.2025 by the complainant alleging that on 26.06.2025 at about 8: 00 PM, when the complainant’s parents were returning from the local market on a scooty, accused Ramesh and Umesh kicked their scooty, causing them to fall. Thereafter, Ramesh and Umesh, along with Leelawati, Anju, Sachin, Rahul, and Archana, armed with weapons, assaulted the complainant’s parents. When the complainant, her sister, and other relatives intervened, they were also assaulted, resulting in multiple injuries. The injured were taken to the hospital, and the seriously injured were referred to a higher centre. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent 2025:UHC:10830 and has been falsely implicated. He has further contended that the applicant is a student pursuing his Bachelor’s degree and has no involvement in the alleged incident. There is no CCTV footage or any other credible material to suggest that the applicant participated in the occurrence as described in the FIR. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the entire family of the applicant has been roped in, on the basis of a false and concocted story, without any specific allegation against the present applicant. Moreover, the daughter and wife of co-accused Ramesh, as well as the wife of co- accused Umesh, have already been granted interim bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, and the applicant stands on an even better footing as no specific role has been attributed to him. 8. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. In view of the above, but, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case for bail. 10. The bail application is thus, allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. ( Alok Mah r a, J.) 05.12.2025 BS