2025:UHC:2477 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/461/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Karan Anand, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant-Nitin @ Dharmendra is praying for regular bail in relation to Case Crime No. 411 of 2024, arising out of FIR dated 28.06.2024 wherein the present applicant and one another co-accused, namely, Ms. Harpreet Kaur were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of the extra judicial confessional statement of the other co- accused Harpreet Kaur. Apart from this, he submits that even the Doctor who conducted the post mortem on the body of the deceased did not support the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the applicant in any manner have no relation with the co-accused Harpreet Kaur and there is no link evidence that at the time of the alleged incident, the applicant was present at the place of occurrence. 5. Apart from this, he submits that since the charge sheet has already been filed, as per the statement, as given by Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State on written instructions, therefore, at this stage, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant and be released on bail. 2025:UHC:2477 6. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail application and argued that as per the post mortem report itself there are nine ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased, copy of which is enclosed in the bail application. Apart from this, he submits that even the Doctor supports the case of the prosecution. On the basis of the written instructions, he submits that as per the medico legal opinion/injury report of Sri Guru Ram Rai Institute of Medical and Health Science dated 27.06.2024, the deceased was shown to be died by way of strangulation/hanging. 7. Apart from this panchnama sketch is also placed on record and I also perused the same. 8. Learned A.G.A. further submits that as per the statement of the other co- accused Ms. Harpreet Kaur, the present applicant was present at the time of incident on the place of occurrence, and, both, the present applicant and the co- accused committed this crime and during this incident the present applicant also sustained scratch marks on his face. 9. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, and, the arguments as advanced by the learned A.G.A. for the State on the basis of the written instructions, this Court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve for bail. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 03.04.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:2477