2025:UHC:4877 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA/354/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant is praying for anticipatory bail in relation to FIR dated 31.05.2024, bearing FIR No. 454 of 2024 registered at P.S. Kotwali Haridwar District Haridwar which was lodged against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 323, 364A IPC. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and this Court at the initial stage granted interim bail on 07.04.2025 after taking into consideration the nature of allegation. 5. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 180 of BNSS have been enclosed including the statement of Dr. Surya Singhal. It is also contended that after thorough investigation and after collecting all credible evidences charge sheet has been filed and the cognizance has been taken. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the evidences, collected during investigation, no offence is made out and only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused the applicant has been implicated and other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail on 21.02.2025 and 25.02.2025. 7. On the other side, Mr. Pal, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application by submitting that when the other co-accused granted anticipatory bail at that time the charge 2025:UHC:4877 sheet was not filed. Now, after completion of investigation and after collecting all credible evidences charge sheet has been filed and, as such, the present applicant does not deserve anticipatory bail. Mr. Pal also submits that even after filing of the charge sheet and the cognizance the applicant is not remediless. He has other statutory remedies provided under the law. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration the counter affidavit and the charge sheet, the applicant does not deserve for anticipatory bail and the same is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.06.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:4877