SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010096612026 BA2/79/2026 Mustkeem --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. M. A. Khan, (through V.C.) and Mr. Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant “Mustkeem, son of Shaukat”, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 15.06.2023 bearing FIR No. 253 of 2023 registered at Police Station – Pathari, District – Haridwar wherein present applicant is charge sheeted and facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC with the charge of killing his wife. 4. The first bail application was rejected on 25.03.2025 and now, the present one is second one. 5. It is argued by Mr. M.A. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2023 and there are in total 18 prosecution witnesses, out of which, uptill date only 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined. He submits that there is no substantial progress in the trial and there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon. He also submits that the child witnesses, who are his own sons, has already been declared hostile by the trial court and since, applicant has already suffered long incarceration of more than 3 years, therefore, he may be released on bail. 6. On the other side, learned State Counsel has not disputed that out of 18 prosecution witnesses, uptill date only 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no substantial progress in the trial, however, he submits that though applicant is facing the trial in a heinous crime but he has already suffered long incarceration. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2023 and out of the 18 prosecution witnesses, till date only 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined, therefore, there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon and the applicant has already suffered long incarceration of more than 3 years, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the second bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant “Mustkeem, son of Shaukat”, be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condition: i. After being released on bail, applicant shall join the trial court proceedings on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. He shall surrender his passport, if any, in the trial court. iii. The applicant shall not temper with the evidence and will not influence any of the witnesses. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.08.2026 SKS