No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA2 No. 238 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. M.K. Ray and Mr. Aadesh Taneja, learned counsels for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. 3. The applicant – Aatif, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/ Case Crime No. 369 of 2024, under Sections 103(1) and Section 3(5) of BNS, registered at P.S.- Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 21.07.2025. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged on 06.11.2024 by the son of the deceased. As per the FIR, his step-mother informed him at about 05: 00 in the morning that his father is lying unconscious on his bed. He alongwith some other relatives, went there and found that his father was not alive. Thereafter, post-mortem was conducted on the body and last rituals were performed in the village. 6. Savita, the step-mother of the complainant and her friend Aatif were named in the FIR. Savita was arrested by the Police on 08.11.2024 and she gave the statement during investigation to the Police that she alongwith the applicant drugged the deceased and thereafter strangulated the deceased to death. On the statement of Savita, applicant was arrested on 09.11.2024. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant has no role in the incident; FIR is delayed by seven days; as the incident took place on 31.10.2024, whereby, FIR was lodged on 06.11.2024; he is innocent and he has been arrested on the confessional statement of the co-accused Savita; charge-sheet has been filed and no further corroboration could be found. 9. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that the offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature. 10. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 11. Accordingly, the present second bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant 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.) 27.11.2025 Ujjwal