2026:UHC:594 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/102/2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. V.K. Guglani, learned counsel for the applicant through Video Conferencing. 2. Mr. Pradeep Lohan, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant–Naved@Bittu, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No. 509 of 2023 (Sessions Trial No. 64 of 2024), registered under Sections 120-B, 302, 34 I.P.C. at Police Station Jashpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. A bare perusal of the F.I.R. would reveal that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant, nor is it disclosed as to how and in what manner the applicant is responsible for the commission of the alleged offence. He would further submit that the applicant is the brother of the deceased and has been implicated for the alleged killing of his own brother without any motive or prior enmity being attributed to him. 5. Learned counsel would further submit that there has been no recovery from the possession of the applicant. It is contended that the applicant’s mother and father have also been implicated in the F.I.R.; however, the applicant’s mother has already been enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 19.07.2024, and the father of the applicant, who is a co-accused, has also been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.01.2026. It is further submitted that, till date, only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. The applicant has no 2026:UHC:594 previous criminal history and has been languishing in jail since 22.12.2023. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar and there is no likelihood of his absconding. It is also submitted that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time; therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the applicant. However, he fairly concedes that the co-accused persons having similar roles have already been granted bail and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 22.12.2023. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perused the record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Alok Mahra, J.) Vacation Judge 20.01.2026 Mamta