IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Bail Application No. 1222 of 2025 Ramzan Ali. ………………… Applicant. Versus State of Uttarakhand ….………Respondents. Present: Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. The present applicant ‘Ramzan Ali’ S/o Allaudin is praying for bail in relation to First Information Report dated 04.02.2025 bearing FIR No. 0039 of 2025, P.S. Jhabrera, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant along with one Mrs. Shreya Sawhney, owner of the factory Suresh Sharma, G.M. Sugar Mill, and one B.N. Chaudhary, the legal officer of the Sugar Factory have been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 115(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and in fact he has no concern with the transaction in between the purchaser and the factory owners and he is a salaried employee serving as a Director in the factory owned by Mrs. Shreya Sawhney. 3. Apart from this, he submits that the owner of the factory Ms. Shreya Sawhney approached this court by way of Anticipatory Bail Application No. 804 of 2015 and she has been granted interim bail by the Coordinate Bench on 21.07.2025. He submits while granting interim bail by the Coordinate Bench in the aforesaid anticipatory bail application the owner of the Factory Ms. Shrey Sawhney admits her liability and stated that Rs. 50 lakhs has already been paid to the informant and Rs. 25 2 lakhs she is ready to pay within 7 days from today i.e. from 21.07.2025, the date when the interim bail was granted and the remaining amount which according to the counsel for the informant was Rupees Eight Crore Fifty Lakhs is agreed to pay by June, 2026. The order granting interim bail by the Coorindate Bench to Ms. Shreya Sawhney dated 21.07.2025 is placed before this court and the same is taken on record and paragraph 5 and 6 in which reference of the statement of the counsel for Ms. Shreya Sawhney and the statement of the counsel for the informant has been given are being reproduced herein as under: “5. Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate, further submitted that a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh) has already been paid to the informant. The said transaction between the parties is a commercial transaction, but the applicant undertakes to pay Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh) within seven days from today and the remaining amounts shall be paid by June, 2026. 6. Mr. Shashi Kant Shandilya, Advocate for the respondent no.2- informant submitted that only a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh) has been received by the informant and Rs.8,50,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Crore Fifty Lakh) is pending against the applicant.” 4. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. have not disputed this fact that the owner of the factory has been granted interim bail in ABA No. 804 of 2025 wherein she herself admits her liability and the part payment has been made and for remaining amount she undertakes to clear by June, 2026, in such an eventuality the present applicant deserves for bail. 5. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant ‘Ramzan Ali’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 01.08.2025 PR