HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Bail Application No.140 of 2024 Narendra Pal Gangwar ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Girish Chandra Lakhchaura (through video conferencing) and Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No.220 of 2020, dated 28.08.2020, under Sections 302, 201 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail. It is second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application has already been dismissed as withdrawn on 06.12.2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was arrested on 28.08.2020; there are total 30 witnesses, till date only 05 witnesses have been examined; PW4 was examined on 14.12.2023; PW5 was examined on 22.10.2024; it is a case based on circumstantial evidences; there is no material which may connect the applicant to the alleged crime. 2 4. Learned State counsel admits the fact that till date out of 30 witnesses only 05 witnesses have been examined and the case is based on the circumstantial evidences. 5. Delay is one of the reasons for considering bail. In the instant matter, generally bail is denied until the witnesses are examined. But, here is the case which pertains to 28.08.2020. Since then, more than four years have completed and out of 30 witnesses, only 05 witnesses have been examined. 6. Having considered the entirety of facts and the delay caused in the matter, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. The bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount; to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 25.03.2025 Sanjay