UKHC010171522025 2026:UHC:6854 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/2069/2025 Umang Saini --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Umang Saini, S/o Sajnay Saini is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 28.05.2025, bearing FIR No. 571 of 2025 P.S. Laksar District Haridwar wherein as many as nine persons including present applicant have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3) and 352 of BNS 2023. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and all nine persons against whom FIR has been lodged have been charge sheeted out of which three accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail and one juvenile was enlarged on bail by the Juvenile Court and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that there are in total 11 prosecution witnesses out of which only two witnesses have been examined so far, therefore, there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon. 5. On the other side, Mr. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State have not disputed that UKHC010171522025 2026:UHC:6854 the present applicant is languishing in jail since 20.05.2025 and have no criminal antecedent, however, he submits that the present applicant is the main assailant on whose pointing out the fire arm was also recovered. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant is languishing in jail for last more than one year, i.e., from 20.06.2025 and the charge sheet has already been filed and the trial has been commenced but there is no substantial progress in the trial and furthermore three persons have been granted anticipatory bail as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant and one juvenile is also granted bail, 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 “Umang Saini” 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 subject to the condition that the applicant after being released on bail shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking unnecessary adjournment and will not make any attempt to contact any of the witness and temper with the evidence. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 04-08-2026 Parul