2026:UHC:504 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 BA1 / 1 7 7 4 / 2 0 2 5 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Pushpa Joshi, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Nipush Mola Joshi, 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. Pavan Kumar Nath, (through V.C.) learned counsel for the complainant. 4. Present applicant Himanshu Kumar, son of Satish Kumar, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 08.02.2025 bearing FIR No. 71 of 2025, Police Station – Patel Nagar, District – Dehradun which was lodged against unknown persons for the offence punishable under Section 143 (3) of BNS, 2023. Subsequently, on completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the present applicant and three other co-accused persons and they are now facing trial for the offences punishable under Section 103 (1), 140 (1), 140 (3), 238 (a) and 3 (5) of the BNS, 2023. 5. It is argued by the learned Sr. Counsel for the applicant that present FIR is nothing but a missing report of a person aged about 80 years and after 18 days, one dead body was recovered and as per the post-mortem report and inquest report, the age of deceased, whose body was recovered on 16.02.2025 was aged about 45 years, therefore, it cannot be presumed that dead body, which was recovered is of the person for whose missing report was lodged, since he was aged about 80 years. 6. Apart from this, it is argued by learned Sr. Counsel for the applicant that applicant is languishing in jail since 28.02.2025 and his wife was also made an accused, who was already enlarged on bail on the ground of pregnancy and the present applicant has no previous criminal history and in fact, is a student of MBBS. 2026:UHC:504 7. On the other side, the learned State Counsel have vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that inquest report and post mortem report of the dead body which was recovered is subject matter of the trial, however, they have not disputed that applicant has no previous criminal history and trial has already been commenced. 8. Mr. Pavan Kumar Nath, learned counsel for the complainant also opposed the bail application by submitting that flesh of the dead body, which was recovered was sent for chemical examination and daughter of the missing person has identified the dead body as father of the complainant. 9. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant is languishing in jail since 28.02.2025 and trial has already commenced and applicant has no previous criminal history and furthermore, the applicant is a student of MBBS and whatever be the evidence has been collected by the prosecution are subject matter of the trial, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant - Himanshu Kumar, son of Satish Kumar, 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. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 10.01.2026 SKS 2026:UHC:504