No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 2462 of 2025 With BA1 No. 1770 of 2025 BA1 No. 1909 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, learned counsel, holding brief of Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel, Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel, holding brief of Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chandel, learned counsel and Mr. Harsh Vardhan Dhanik, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned D.A.G. for the State. 3. The applicants – Bhoora @ Abhishek, Aakash and Aman Kumar, who are in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 209 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 191(3), 117(2) and 351(3) of BNS, registered at P.S.- I.T.I., District Udham Singh Nagar, have sought their release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged on 30.07.2025 by the brother of the injured victim, wherein, he has alleged that on 28.07.2025, at about 12:00 in the midnight, when his brother, who used to work as a cook in marriages, was returning home from his work, he was beaten up by some unknown persons badly with stick and weapons without any reason, resultantly, his brother received serious injuries. Upon information being received by some villager, they went to the alleged place, where they found the injured victim lying near the railway track unconscious. Thereafter, he was taken to the hospital for treatment. The assailants also made the video clip of the alleged incident, which got viral and only after seeing the video clip, the villagers identified the assailants. Thereafter, the FIR was lodged. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case; that there is a delay of two days in lodging of FIR, that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants and that the applicants have no enmity with the injured victim and that even in the FIR, enmity has been shown with one Krishna and the present applicants have no concern with Krishna, thus, there is there is no occasion for the applicants to commit such offence. 8. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that the offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature; that after completion of the investigation, sufficient evidences have been found against the applicants and on the basis of such evidences, chargesheet has been filed against the applicants; that all the applicants are identified in the video clip, wherein, they are seen dragging the injured victim towards the railway track after assaulting him, which fully supports the prosecution story, therefore, the present bail application is liable to be dismissed. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that there is no good ground to enlarge the applicants on bail and the present bail applications deserve to be rejected. 10. The present bail applications are rejected. (Alok Mahra J.) 02.04.2026 Ujjwal