2025:UHC:9125 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.1092 of 2025 14th October, 2025 Hariram --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Mayank Joshi, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned AGA for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Applicant Hariram, who is in judicial custody in Case Crime/ FIR No.74 of 2023, under Sections 302 & 201 of IPC, registered at P. S. Raipur District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3. As per the prosecution story, on 19.01.2025, a First Information Report was lodged by the informant/complainant alleging that one Shanti Devi came to him and informed that her husband, who is the present applicant, had murdered her relative Vijaypal with an axe. Upon hearing this, the complainant went to 2025:UHC:9125 2 the place of incident and found Vijaypal lying dead in a pool of blood with an axe injury. Consequently, the FIR came to be registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 10.02.2023. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is no eye-witness to the incident; that the statement of the complainant recorded as PW-1 is contradictory and unreliable; that, according to the complainant himself, the wife of the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence and has not seen the alleged incident. It is thus argued that the case is based purely on hearsay and assumptions, and therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the FSL report reveals that the DNA of the accused matches with that found on the shirt and weapon (axe) recovered during the investigation. He has further contended that 2025:UHC:9125 3 the statement of the complainant cannot be discarded at the stage of consideration of bail, and the gravity of the offence militates against the grant of bail. 7. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature, punishable under Section 302 IPC. The material on record, particularly the FSL report, prima facie, connects the applicant with the crime. In the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9. It is observed that the trial commenced in the year 2023, and till date, only one prosecution witness has been examined. The learned Trial Court is, therefore, requested to expedite the trial, preferably within a reasonable period, in accordance with law. (Alok Mahra, J.) 14.10.2025 BS BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2ea cbf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE518 5F418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.10.14 16:18:11 +05'30'