No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1688 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant – Rahul Kumar, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 173 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, registered at P.S.- Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged on 28.06.2025 by the wife of the injured victim, wherein, she has alleged that on 27.06.2025 at about 01:30 AM in the midnight, when the husband of the complainant was sleeping in a bed inside his house, the two unknown persons parked their motorcycle in front of their house and one of the persons came inside the house and fired gunshot at complainant’s husband with the intention of killing him, and, when after hearing the sound of gunshot time, the complainant and her husband woke up, the unknown persons ran away on a motorcycle. The bullet hit below the right hip of the complainant’s husband. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is not named in the FIR and only on the basis of the statement given by the other co-accused, he has been chargesheeted. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that the bare perusal of the FIR and the statement of the complainant would reveal that one unknown person had fired a gunshot, which caused injury on the left leg of the husband of the complainant. Statement of the nephew of the injured was also taken as he was also sleeping in the roof of the house of the injured. There is material contradiction in the statement of the complainant and the nephew inasmuch as the complainant has said that there was only one person who entered the house and injured the husband of the complainant by shooting at him while nephew has said that he has seen four persons running away from the house of the injured. It is further contended that there was no recovery of the firearm from the applicant and that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.07.2025. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further drawn the attention of this Court to the medical report in which it is shown that injuries are grievous, but, not dangerous to life. 8. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that the offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature. 9. 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. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 11. 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 Mahra J.) 11.02.2026 Ujjwal