2025:UHC:2609 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 541 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Imran Ali Khan, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Maksood alias Mehemud Hasen’ is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report bearing FIR No. 34 of 2025 dated 07.02.2025, P.S. Ramnagar, District Nainital, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 5, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and in fact the entire story has been cooked up by the prosecution and there is no any credible evidence. 5. He submits that the applicant has been implicated only on information of a Secret Informer (Mukhbir) that a person is manufacturing in large scale arms and ammunitions and on his information the applicant was taken into custody and various weapons were recovered. 6. He also contended that there is another accused, who ran away from the incident. He submits that the applicant have no nexus with the manufacturing unit. He further submits that there is no independent witness and whatever the article, which has been shown to be recovered from the applicant, are in fact not used for manufacturing of arms and ammunitions. 7. He further submits that all the offences are triable by the Magistrate and the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.02.2025. 8. On the other side, learned State counsel submits that investigation is still going on and the other co-accused subsequently have surrendered. He submits that huge arms and ammunitions and 2025:UHC:2609 articles, which were used in manufacturing of the arms including weapons, were recovered from the applicant. He submits that manufacturing of such a huge arms and ammunitions requires a deep scrutiny since there is a possibility of commission of organized crime in the society. 9. He submits that if the applicant is granted bail at this stage then there may be a possibility that he will make an attempt to influence the investigation. 10. I found force on submission of the learned State counsel, therefore, at this stage this court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve for bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.04.2025 PR 2025:UHC:2609