2025:UHC:5180 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 750 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Ujjawal’ S/o Beer Singh is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 29.03.2025 bearing FIR No. 135 of 2025 P.S. Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar, wherein, 6 to 7 unknown persons were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of BNS, 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, which is evident from the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR since the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons and submits that there is a delay in the FIR and he has been implicated on the basis of suspicion and there is no direct evidence and the place where the incident took place was highly crowded area, but no one has seen the alleged incident and merely on the basis of the video footages the applicant has been implicated. 5. Apart from this, he submits that the other three co-accused namely Deep Tyagi, Abhishek Tyagi and Rohit have already been enlarged on bail by this court. 6. On the other side, learned A.G.A. Mr. Sandeep Sharma submits that on the basis of video footages the applicant was seen with the main assailant namely Nishkarsh and Udairaj and they ran away after committing the offence in the car in which the main assailant came. He further submits that the investigation is still going on and if the applicant is enlarged on bail there may be possibility that he may influence the investigation and furthermore he submits that the applicant is the resident of Meerut, however, he has not 2025:UHC:5180 disputed that the applicant has no previous criminal history. He further suggests that if the applicant is enlarged on bail then some stringent conditions be imposed since the investigation is still going on. Apart from this learned State counsel also submits that the bail application of the main accused Nishkarsh have already been rejected by this court. 7. Learned State counsel have also not disputed this fact that the other three co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that as per prosecution the main assailant as per the prosecution is Nishkarsh, who has having criminal history and the applicant has no previous criminal history, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail by imposing some stringent conditions. 9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant ‘Ujjawal’ be enlarged on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall cooperate with the pending investigation and will not make any attempt to tamper any evidence and threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, with the concerned court. (iii) If the applicant is found to be involved in any criminal activity in future the prosecution is directed to immediately move an application for cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 19.06.2025 PR 2025:UHC:5180