2025:UHC:7644 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedin gs or directions and Registrar’ s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2/194/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. (Through V.C.) 1. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Present applicant Nishkarsh Tyagi @ Dhruv Tyagi, S/o Shri Neeraj Tyagi is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 29.03.2025, bearing Case Crime No. 135 of 2025 wherein the present applicant along with other co-accused, in total five person, have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3) of BNS 2023. 3. This is the second bail application and the first bail application was rejected on 17.06.2025. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that after rejection of first bail application of the present applicant co- accused Udayraj was granted bail on 08.07.2025, though, he has criminal history of one case. He submits that the applicant deserves for bail on the ground that other co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court after rejection of first bail application of the applicant. Apart from this, he submits that in other cases bearing FIR Nos. 272 of 2023, 148 of 2024 and 278 of 2024 the applicant is already bailed out and in FIR No. 86 of 2025 the applicant was not charge sheeted and he is also bailed out in FIR No. 136 of 2025. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet has already been filed and all other co- 2025:UHC:7644 accused have already been enlarged on bail. 5. On the other side, Mr. Pal, learned A.G.A. submits that present applicant is the main assailant and keeping in view his past history, he does not deserve for bail, however, he has not disputed this fact that all the co-accused have already been enlarged on bail, and furthermore there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant since charge sheet has already been filed and he has also not disputed this fact that one of the co-accused Uday Raj have been enlarged on bail after rejection of first bail application of the applicant. 6. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that other co-accused have been enlarged on bail after rejection of first bail application of the applicant and in all other previous cases the applicant is already bailed out and in this particular case since charge sheet has already been filed, and, as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Nishkarsh Tyagi @ Dhruv Tyagi 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. 9. It is made clear that after being released on bail if the applicant is found to be indulged in any criminal activity, the Trial Court is free to proceed against the applicant and cancel the bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.08.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:7644