HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.334 of 2025 Balkar Singh …..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Arvind Vasistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the informant. With First Bail Application No.335 of 2025 Pargat Singh …..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Arvind Vasistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the informant. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Since both these bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are being heard together and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants Balkar Singh and Pargat Singh are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.83 of 2024, dated 28.03.2024, under Sections 302, 307, 120-B, 34 IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station 2 Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the co-accused having similar role has already been granted bail. 5. This fact is admitted by the learned State counsel. 6. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that, in fact, the gun which was used in the offence was mortgaged by one of the co-accused and it is the applicant, who got it released. 7. The Court wanted to know, as to what is the document available in this regard? He would submit that one of the co-accused has stated so. 8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that these are the cases fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail. 9. The bail applications are allowed. 3 10. Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount; by each one of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 05.03.2025 Sanjay