2025:UHC:5859 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2/98/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. (Through V.C.) 1. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel with Ms. Suraiya Naaz, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. For the State. 3. This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the present applicant Mohd. Saheem, S/o Saleem, seeking bail in relation to FIR dated 20.12.2024, bearing FIR No. 620 of 2024, registered at P.S. Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar wherein the present applicant has been charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) read with Section 61(2) of BNS 2023. 4. First bail application was moved by the present applicant and another co- accused Mohd. Shariq which was rejected on 21.03.2025. First bail application was rejected primarily on the ground that the investigation is still going on and therefore, at this stage if the applicant is enlarged on bail it will certainly affect the entire investigation. 5. Now, the second bail application has been moved on several grounds and one of the ground is that another co-accused, namely, Naeem was granted bail by the Trial Court on 07.05.2025 that too after rejection of the first bail application of the present applicant. The another ground is that so far as the present applicant is concerned, the investigation is already completed and the charge sheet has been filed on 18.02.2025, and this fact was not brought to the knowledge of this Court while rejecting the first bail application, and, as a matter of fact, charge sheet was already filed before the rejectionof first 2025:UHC:5859 bail application. 6. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the prosecution main accused is one Gurvinder who has not been arrested so far and the investigation against him is going on. Next ground is that the applicant has no previous criminal history and since investigation has already been completed against the applicant, therefore, at this juncture there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. Lastly, it is argued that the offences in which the applicant is charge sheeted are triable by the Magistrate. 7. On the other side, Mr. Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State has not disputed this fact that against the applicant investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed, and, furthermore, has not disputed this fact that co-accused, namely, Naeem has already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court and he also submits that the offences in which applicant has been charge sheeted are triable by the Magistrate. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the charge sheet has already been filed against the present applicant and other co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court and offences in which the applicant has been charge sheeted are triable by the Magistrate, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Mohd. Saheem be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall join the 2025:UHC:5859 trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking unnecessary adjournment and if he is found indulge in any such activity the trial court is free to take immediate action against the applicant including cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 11.09.2025 Parul