2026:UHC:486 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2 / 3 0 2 / 2 0 2 5 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Himanshu Sain and Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. This is the second bail application and the first bail application was rejected by this Court on 17.03.2025. 5. Present applicant Ankit, son of Amarpal is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 13.12.2024 bearing FIR No. 307 of 2024, Police Station – Khanpur, District – Haridwar wherein applicant along with two others have been implicated and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 103 (1), 238, 3 (5), 311 of BNS. 6. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and there is no direct evidence against the present applicant and in fact, on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused and recovery of two cheque books, on the pointing out of the applicant, from the bushes on 23.12.2024, after ten days of the incident, applicant has been implicated. 7. Apart from this, he argued that investigation is totally faulty, since no forensic examination of the vehicle owned by one Anil and used by Sonu Fauji in the crime has been carried out and this is a great lapse on the part of the investigating agency. He further submits that investigation also appears to be faulty since from the entire record, it appears that the investigating agency somehow wants to save the main culprit. He further submits that applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024. 2026:UHC:486 8. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for the complainant submits that he has already moved a petition before this Court for transfer of the investigation to CBI, since the investigation is faulty. 9. On the other side, the learned State Counsel has not made any comment on the faulty investigation but he submits that present applicant has been implicated on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused and also on recovery of two cheque books on the pointing out of the applicant from bushes. He further submits that bail of co-accused Robin has been rejected since body of deceased was recovered on his pointing out. 10. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024 and the only evidence against him for recovery of two cheque books recovered from bushes on his pointing out of and rejection of bail of co-accused Robin have not impact on this bail of applicant, since on his pointing, dead body was recovered and the applicant has no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the second bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant - Ankit, son of Amarpal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 13. It is made clear that grant of this bail shall not be treated as precedent. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 10.01.2026 SKS 2026:UHC:486