No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1865 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Mohd. Matlub, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant – Arbaj @ Sohail, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 0004 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 3(5), 61(2), 103(1) and 238 of BNS, registered at P.S.- Selaqui, District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. In this case, initially a missing report was lodged on 14.01.2025 by the father of the victim, under Sections 137(2) of BNS, alleging therein that he lives in rented accommodation and his son Arman, aged about 11 years, is missing since 11.01.2025. They tried searching for him, but, he could not be traced. During investigation, the dead body of the missing boy was found on 21.01.2025 from the pointing out of the co-accused. On the statement of the co-accused, the applicant was also arrested and chargesheet was filed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case and that the applicant is not named in the FIR. 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 there is recovery of drawstring (nara) used in the commission of offence from the pointing out of the applicant and that as per the statement of the co-accused, applicant was the mastermind in kidnapping of the deceased, therefore, the present bail application is liable to be dismissed. 9. Considering the fact that there is recovery of drawstring (nara) used in the commission of offence from the pointing out of the applicant and as per the statement of the co-accused, applicant was the mastermind in kidnapping of the deceased, this Court is of the view that there is no good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail and the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 10. The present bail application is rejected. (Alok Mahra J.) 27.03.2026 Ujjwal