No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1671 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant – Rajeev Tomar, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 390 of 2024, under Section 103, 351(3) and 91 of BNS and Section 3/25 of Arms Act, registered at P.S.- Bazpur, 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 by the husband of the deceased in which it is alleged that applicant has murdered his wife. Applicant is the real brother of the deceased and it is reported in the FIR that applicant was not happy with the marriage of the complainant with the deceased and he had earlier also threatened them that he would kill both of them. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the motive, which is assigned in the FIR, is of honour killing, but, after the marriage, the deceased and applicant lived in the same locality, in which applicant resided at Kashipur. Marriage took place on 04.12.2023 and the deceased was murdered on 03.09.2024. It is further submitted that there is contradiction in the statements given to the Police by the eye-witness and the complainant, which goes to prove that applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. It is also submitted that country-made gun was shown to be recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and even in the recovery memo, no date is mentioned. 7. 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. 8. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is contradiction in the statements given to the Police by the eye-witness and the complainant, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. 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.) 18.04.2026 Ujjwal