SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No.1378 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Khushi Chaudhary, learned counsel, holding brief of Ms. Shweta Jain, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned AAG along with Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the State . 3. Present applicant–Bhushan Chaudhary S/o Ram Chand and Vinod S/o Nagendra Sahni are seeking regular bail in relation to first information report dated 29.01.2009 bearing FIR No.55 of 2009, Police Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun, in which both the applicants are facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 401 of IPC. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case crime number, the applicants were enlarged on bail on 26.02.2009, and, thereafter, they were not aware about the trial Court proceedings even their counsel has not informed them, consequently, the non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicants, and, thereafter, the applicants were arrested and sent to jail on 23.05.2025. 5. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that they were not aware about any date in the ongoing trial, due to which they could not appear, however, now the applicants undertake that they will join the trial Court proceeding without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. 6. On the other side, Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned AAG have not disputed this fact that both the applicants were enlarged on bail on 26.02.2009, and, thereafter, due to their non- appearance, the non-bailable warrants were issued and subsequently they were arrested and sent to jail. 7. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned AAG fairly submits that if the applicants undertake to join the trial Court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment, then in such an eventuality, their bail applications can be considered. 8. After hearing the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that in relation to Case Crime No.55 of 2009, both the applicants were enlarged on bail on 26.02.2009, but subsequently both of them were arrested since they could not appear iin the trial Court proceeding, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve for bail. 9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicants, namely, Bhushan Chaudhary and Vinod, be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, by each of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that after being released on bail both the applicant shall regularly join the trial Court proceeding without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 11.08.2025 R.Bisht