2025:UHC:11047 I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 1 1 TH DECEMBER, 2 0 2 5 FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO.2 3 9 7 of 2 0 2 5 Sanjeevan ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder. Hon ’ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a,J. The Applicant- Sanjeevan is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.377 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar. 2 . Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the respondent. 3 . According to the respondent, the applicant assaulted his mother, due to which she sustained injuries. 1 2025:UHC:11047 4 . Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, submitted that the said allegations are false. Applicant was not involved in the alleged offence. The informant Lokesh (PW3), the husband of the injured, Smt. Santlesh (PW1), the injured and one witness Anuj Kumar (PW2) have not supported the case of the prosecution. They turned hostile. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. He has no criminal antecedents, and, he is in custody since 10.05.2025. 5 . Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally. However, she conceded that the informant, injured and the witness (PW2) did not support the case of the prosecution. 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 trial 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 2 2025:UHC:11047 the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, 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- Sanjeevan 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. Dt: 11.12.2025 Neha 3 NEHA BISHT Digitally signed by NEHA BISHT DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6f1c15b6305912b3f008e9a4a8038ee7326b08 b2d0e018b01be753f014836d27, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=3D89DC33779FB9677068452F32DE6BA 960BFE64D819EE44CA9CCE487B2FE0F92, cn=NEHA BISHT Date: 2025.12.11 18:20:09 +05'30'