No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 2368 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Lalit Sharma and Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsels for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant – Reena Sindhu, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 161 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 3/5, 61(2) and 238 of BNS, registered at P.S.- Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail. 4. In this case, brother of the deceased lodged an FIR on 17.06.2025, in which, it was alleged that the deceased has been murdered by the applicant. After investigation, Police filed a chargesheet against the applicant as well as against one Paritosh under Sections under Sections 103(1), 3/5, 61(2) and 238 of BNS. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant has falsely been implicated in the case; that the body of the deceased was recovered on 05.06.2025 and post-mortem was conducted the next day. As per the post-mortem report, death happened within seven days, maggots were present over whole body, hairs and nails were loose, blisters were found over whole body and skin was peel off. As per the presumption, the death have most probably occurred a week ago. 6. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the bail application. He would submit that applicant was spotted in the CCTV footage in a car which was owned by the deceased in Siddh Bali Barrier on 02.06.2025 between 05:58 and 06:52 AM, where the car was being driven by some other person. The person driving the car could not be identified in the CCTV footage, but applicant was identified. He has further submitted that the applicant and the co- accused have confessed their crime and the motive assigned in the confessional statement is that the applicant in connivance with the co- accused, killed the deceased to grab the house which he was selling to repay some loan amount of approx Rs. 20 Lakhs. 7. To this learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no circumstantial evidence to this effect and the applicant and the co-accused have been made the accused only on the basis of their confessional statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS. Even as per the prosecution case, the chain is not complete and other co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. Having considered the submissions under the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the chain is not complete and other co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. (Alok Mahra J.) 27.04.2026 Ujjwal