2025:UHC:5100 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/716/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal and Mr. Suryakant Maithani, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Udit Panwar, S/o Pradeep Panwar is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR/Case Crime No. 41 of 2025 registered at P.S. Dalanwala District Dehradun wherein the present applicant along with one Yash Negi were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the applicant is the student, and, furthermore, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and the injuries, as alleged, to be caused to the injured are simple in nature. He further argued that one of the co-accused, namely, Yash Negi has already been enlarged on bail by the court of learned Session Judge, Dehradun by order dated 20.05.2025 and claims parity. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed and, as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. 5. On the other side, State Counsel has not disputed this fact that the other co- accused Yash Negi has already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court and submits that since the charge sheet has been filed in view of the statement as given by the learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, in such an eventuality 2025:UHC:5100 there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. 6. Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned counsel who appears for the complainant seriously opposed the bail application and submits that as per the prosecution present applicant is the main accused, however, he has also not disputed this fact that the co- accused has already been enlarged on bail. 7. Earlier the present applicant was granted short term bail for a period of six weeks by order dated 07.05.2025. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that other co- accused has been enlarged on bail by the trial court and charge sheet has been filed, and, as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Udit Panwar be released on bail on the same bail bond on the basis of which the applicant was released on short term bail. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall furnish two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned within a week. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 18.06.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:5100