2025:UHC:9341 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2 No. 145 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. R.S. Sammal with Mrs. Sarita Bisht, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr. Deepak Bhadwaj and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. Present applicants namely Krishna Singh S/o Shri Jagannath Singh and Sumit Singh S/o Shri Roop Singh are praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 19.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 345 of 2024 P.S. Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, both the applicants along with one Smt. Sundarwati were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 127(2), 3(5) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023. 4. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected on 03.03.2025. 5. On completion of the investigation both the applicants have been chargesheeted though Smt. Sundarwati was exonerated. Mr. R.S. Sammal, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated and are languishing in jail since 20.10.2024. He further submits that in total five prosecution witnesses have been examined so far; however, as per the prosecution PW5-Sundarwati is the only so called eye witness but she has been declared hostile by the Trial Court on 05.07.2025. He submits that other prosecution witnesses i.e. PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4 all are infact as per the prosecution are not the eye witnesses of the incident. He submits that there are in total 22 prosecution witnesses but uptill date only 5 witnesses have been examined and taking into consideration that the present applicants are languishing in jail since 20.10.2024 and there is no need of their custodial interrogation and furthermore the applicants have no previous criminal history, they should be enlarged on bail. 2025:UHC:9341 6. On the other side, learned State counsel submits that after collecting all credible evidences the chargesheet has been filed and have not disputed that uptill date only five prosecution witnesses have been examined and have also not disputed that the Trial Court on 05.07.2025 declared PW5, the sole eye witness as hostile. 7. Apart from this, learned State counsel have not disputed that the applicant have no previous criminal history; however he submits that one prosecution witness Kamaljeet-PW1, the brother of the deceased, supports the case of the prosecution, though he was not the eye witness. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the trial has already been commenced and uptill date out of 22 prosecution witnesses only 5 witnesses have been examined and PW5, who as per the prosecution is the eye witness, have been declared hostile and further taking into consideration that the present applicants are languishing in jail since 20.10.2024 and have no previous criminal history, this court is of the view that both 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 applicants Krishna Singh and Sumit Singh be released on bail on furnishing their personal bonds and two reliable sureties by each of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicants will participate in the trial proceeding on each and every date and will not make any attempt to influence any witnesses. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 16.10.2025 PR 2025:UHC:9341