2025:UHC:7100 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1093/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Deepak Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder the State. 3. Present applicant “Naushad, son of Noora Nidori,” is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 30.03.2006 bearing FIR No. 147 of 2006, Police Station – Haldwani, District – Nainital which was lodged for the offences punishable under Section 398, 401 IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in this case, applicant was enlarged on bail by the Judicial Magistrate on 24.05.2006 and thereafter, charges were framed on 11.08.2006 but he was not aware about further dates of the trial court proceedings. He submits that since applicant could not put his appearance in the trial court proceedings, therefore, arrest warrants were issued in the year 2006 and 2012, thereafter, applicant was taken into custody on 04.02.2025 and is in jail since then. 5. So far as merit of the case is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution itself before committing the offence as alleged applicant and his associates were arrested. He submits that on completion of investigation, four persons were charge sheeted and one of the accused namely Yusuf died during trial. 6. On the other side, Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder has not disputed this fact that earlier applicant was granted bail by the Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani on 24.05.2006 and charges were framed on 11.08.2006. He further submits that since the applicant and other co-accused could not join trial court proceeding, therefore, arrest warrant was issued and ultimately, the applicant was arrested. He further submits that if 2025:UHC:7100 the applicant is enlarged on bail, then there may be possibility that he may not cooperate with the trial. 7. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the incident is of 2006 and applicant was enlarged on bail on 24.05.2006 and subsequently, was taken into custody due to non appearance of the applicant in trial court proceedings, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail but some stringent condition should be imposed so that old trial of 2006 may be expedited. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant “Naushad, son of Noora Nidori,” be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is made clear that after being released on bail, applicant join trial court proceedings without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.08.2025. SKS