SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2026:UHC:568 BA1 No. 2453 of 2025 Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait han i, J. Mr. Navneet Kaushik and Mr. Sumit Bajaj, learned counsels for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned D.A.G. along with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant- Nadeem Akhtar, aged about 47 years, S/o Abdul Sattar, R/o Mohammad Raza Colony, Village Sarbarkheda, Thana Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 417 of 2025, registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 121(1), 132, 221, 352, 351(2), 324(3), 190, 196(c) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 4. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik and Mr. Sumit Bajaj, learned counsel for the Applicant, and Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned D.A.G., along with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State, and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated and has been made a scapegoat on account of political rivalry, as the Applicant had contested the election for the post of Mayor from Kashipur. It is further submitted that the Applicant was not present at the place of incident and was arbitrarily picked up from his house, assaulted, and thereafter taken into custody. It is alleged that in a highly illegal manner, a country- made pistol was falsely shown to have been recovered from the possession of the Applicant. It is also submitted that the Applicant was not provided with the grounds of arrest at the time of arrest, there is no independent witness of the alleged incident, and the entire case rests solely upon the version of police personnel. The Applicant has been in judicial custody since 23.09.2025. 6. On the other hand, learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the bail application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the Applicant deserves to be released on bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. 10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) Vacation Judge 16.01.2026 Shiksha