HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No. 471 of 2025 Amrish ........Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Rawat, AGA for the State. Mr. S.C. Bhatt, Advocate for the informant. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant Amrish is in judicial custody in FIR No. 624 of 2024, under Sections 310(3), 115(2), 61(2) & 317(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co- accused Rajeev having similar role has already been granted bail. 4. This fact is admitted by the learned State Counsel. 5. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there are CCTV footages of the incident. 6. In fact, when the bail application of the co-accused Rajeev was decided on 06.03.2025, the following arguments were made on behalf of the informant:- “5. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that the applicant and the others can be seen running with Lathi, Danda from near the place of incident. He would submit that 2 the faces of those assailants are not identifiable in the CCTV footage. But, he would submit that the injured Prashant is the resident of the same village, who can easily identify the assailants.” 7. Thus, the argument on behalf of the informant on that date was that the assailants were seen running from the spot. It is argued that the applicant is involved in multiple cases. Admittedly, the applicant is not a previous convict. 8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. 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 in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 03.07.2025 Avneet/