2026:UHC:3256 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures BA1 No.1180 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Deepak Petshali, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Akshay Latwal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant seeking regular bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.775 of 2024, under Sections 127(2), 310(2) and 317(3) of B.N.S.S., 2023, registered at Police Station Kotwali Manglore, District Haridwar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the applicant has been languishing in judicial custody since 15.09.2024. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his implication rests solely on the alleged confessional statement of a co-accused, which has no evidentiary value in the absence of corroboration. It is also contended that there is no independent witness to the alleged occurrence and no recovery of any incriminating or stolen article has been effected from the possession of the applicant. The applicant was neither apprehended from the spot nor subjected to any test identification parade during the course of investigation. Learned counsel further submits that a co- accused, namely Raees, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in BA1 No. 948 of 2025 vide order dated 02.07.2025, and the case of the present applicant stands on identical footing, thereby entitling him to bail on the ground of parity. It is lastly submitted that the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application, contending that the allegations against the applicant are grave 2026:UHC:3256 and serious in nature and, therefore, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the allegations against the applicant are grave and pertain to serious offences under the B.N.S.S., 2023. The nature of accusations, coupled with the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, reflects a prima facie involvement of the applicant in the crime. Though it is contended that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his implication is based on the statement of a co-accused, the case diary reveals that such statement is supported by surrounding circumstances collected during investigation. At this stage, meticulous examination of evidence is neither warranted nor permissible. The absence of recovery or non-holding of test identification parade, by itself, does not demolish the prosecution case at the stage of bail. Furthermore, considering the severity of punishment in the event of conviction, there exists a reasonable apprehension that the applicant may abscond or influence witnesses if enlarged on bail. The ground of parity is also not attracted, as the role attributed to the present applicant appears distinguishable from that of the co-accused who has been granted bail. 6. Considering the nature of accusations and the overall facts and circumstances, no ground for grant of bail is made out at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Alok Mahra, J.) 29.04.2026 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853 65445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D 454C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66 , cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.04.30 13:23:45 +05'30'