UKHC010128452025 2026:UHC:5169 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1500/2025 Pranav Saini --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Ravi Bisht, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Pranav Saini, S/o Ravindra Saini is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 09.01.2025, bearing FIR No. 0025 of 2025, P.S. Manglore District Haridwar wherein he along with one another person, namely, Mohd. Arif have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1) of BNS 2023. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in this FIR charge sheet was filed on 10.04.2025 wherein learned Judicial Magistrate I, Rookee District Haridwar took cognizance on 16.04.2025 and summoned the applicant to face the trial for the offences punishable under Section 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1) of BNS 2023. It is further argued that applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 and there are in total 214 prosecution witnesses out of which only 8 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, therefore, there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon. He further submits that there is one more FIR against the applicant i.e. FIR No. 135 of 2025 wherein the Coordinate Bench on 13.04.2026 granted bail. Apart from this, he submits that other co-accused was granted interim bail by this Court on 30.01.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits UKHC010128452025 2026:UHC:5169 that taking into consideration that applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 and already served long incarceration and there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon, since, out of 214 prosecution witnesses up till date only 8 prosecution witnesses have been examined, the applicant be released on bail. 6. On the other side, Mr. Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State have not disputed that there are in total 214 prosecution witnesses out of which only 8 prosecution witnesses have been examined and other co-accused has been granted interim bail in ABA No. 90 of 2025 on 30.01.2025 and applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025. 7. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 and there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon since out of 214 prosecution witnesses only 8 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant Pranav 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. 10. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 30-06-2026 Parul