HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No. 683 of 2023 Ram Kumar ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Rakesh Joshi, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. (Oral) 1. The applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 0248 of 2022, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Selaqui, District Dehradun. He has sought release on bail. 2. According to the FIR, the applicant and the victim (deceased) were married. The applicant is alleged to be a drunkard who often physically assaulted the deceased. On 05.10.2022, the sister of the deceased (informant) was informed that the victim was unwell. However, upon reaching the location, she found the victim dead, leading to the lodging of the FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are false and frivolous. The applicant denies committing any offence and claims he has been falsely implicated based solely on CCTV footage. According to the doctor’s opinion, the death could have been caused by an accident, such as an epileptic attack followed by a fall. It is further alleged that the recovery of the alleged weapon of offence (the stick) suggests it was planted. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel has argued that, as per the photographs submitted with the bail application, the applicant is shown assaulting the victim. According to the medical report, the victim suffered a head injury inflicted by the accused using a stick. Furthermore, the autopsy report mentions a skull fracture, which is identified as a fatal injury. 2 5. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer noted that CCTV footage shows the accused directly involved in the crime. The alleged murder weapon (the stick) was also recovered. 6. The CCTV footage, dated 05.10.2022, around 3:00 PM, includes photographs attached as Annexure No. 4. Specifically, in a cropped photograph from the footage, a sequence of movements involving the applicant and the victim is recorded. In Picture No. 3, the accused appears to be chasing the victim, and in Picture No. 4, the victim and the accused are seen together, heading in the opposite direction compared to Pictures Nos. 1, 2, and 3. 7. In my opinion, without delving into the details as it may affect the merits of the case, there appear to be sufficient grounds for bail. Merely viewing the photographs and considering the medical records submitted does not conclusively establish that the deceased’s death resulted from the alleged brutal assault by the accused. 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 10.01.2025 R. Uniyal