2026:UHC:587 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/94/2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. T.A. Khan, learned senior counsel (through Video Conferencing) assisted by Mr. Vinay Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General along with Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant–Zubair Alam, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No. 417 of 2025, registered under Sections 121(1), 132, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 221, 324(3), 351(2), 352, 109, 196(1)(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar has sought his release on bail. 4. An F.I.R. was lodged alleging therein that on 21.09.2025 at about 9:40 P.M., without obtaining any prior permission from the competent authority, Nadim, Hanif, Daniesh and approximately 400– 500 unknown persons assembled and conducted a march purportedly showing support/love towards Mohammed. It is further alleged that the said persons were carrying lathis, dandas and other articles, and during the said march they indulged in activities alleged to be antisocial in nature, thereby causing disturbance and damage to public property. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated 2026:UHC:587 in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R., nor is there any specific role attributed to him; that, the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.09.2025. It is also pointed out that the co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 14.01.2026 and 15.01.2026, and the case of the present applicant stands on the same footing. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application; however, learned State counsel fairly admits that the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court and that the applicant is in judicial custody since 25.09.2025. 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, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Alok Mahra, J.) Vacation Judge 20.01.2026 Mamta