2025:UHC:11138 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 / 2 1 7 0 of 2 0 2 5 W it h BA1 No. 2 1 7 1 of 2 0 2 5 Hon 'ble Rak esh Th apliy al, J. 1. Ms. Shumayla Zafri, learned counsel with Ms. Lubhna Jahan, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Since both the bail applications arising out of the same FIR, therefore both the applications are being decided by a common order. 4. Present applicants-Virendra Singh, S/ o Dharma Singh, Aman Kumar, S/ o Ashok Singh, Rudraksh, S/ o Rajendra and Rohit, S/ o Dharamveer are praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 23.10.2025, bearing FIR No. 262 of 2025, P.S. Kotwali Kotdwar District Pauri Garhwal wherein they have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections , 3(5), 132, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 351(2), 352, 109, 61(2), 126 (2) of BNS 2023 read with Section 3 of Uttarakhand Prevention of Defacement of Public Property Act, 2003. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that all the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated and in fact this is nothing but a case of sudden provocation between the two groups during Ram Leela in Dev Ram Pur Talla and these applicants have nothing to do with that incident, however, when they got information that some incident was happened then they reached at the place of occurrence for the purposes to settle the dispute but one Ashish Dabral came to the spot and quarrelled two persons Sanjay and Ved Prakash and taking into consideration the law and order situation 2025:UHC:11138 all these three persons were challaned under Section 172 of BNSS 2023 and the allegation is that after challan these applicants in association with some other persons make an attempts to put hurdle on the police personnel from doing their duties. 5. It is also contended that Ashish Dabral after taking him in custody was released by the police. She further submits that applicants are languishing in jail since 22.10.2025. She further submits that the applicants have no criminal history. She also submits that even on perusal of the FIR as many as 23 persons with some unknown persons have been implicated and no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. She further submits that other accused, though females, with similar role have been enlarged on bail. 6. On the other side, Mr. Sain, learned Brief Holder submits that investigation is still going on; however, he has not disputed that on perusal of the FIR no specific role has been assigned to the applicants and it appears to be a case of sudden provocation between two different groups. 7. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the FIR, prima facie, it reveals that dispute is nothing but the case of sudden provocation between two groups. Further, there is no specific allegation against the applicants and taking into consideration that the applicants are languishing in jail since 22.10.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicants Virendra Singh, Aman Kumar, Rudraksh, and Rohit be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable 2025:UHC:11138 sureties by each one of them each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is further made clear that after being released on bail the applicants shall cooperate with the investigation. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.12.2025 Parul