No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 2052 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned D.A.G. for the State. 3. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant – Vishal Anand, seeking regular bail in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 199 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 109, 351(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, registered at Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged on 28.04.2025, under Sections 103(1), 109, 351(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, in which, Avdesh Kumar Saluja and Dinesh Kumar Saluja were named in the FIR. After investigation, chargesheet was also filed under Sections 103(1), 109, 351(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, in which, the applicant has also been made the accused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is only one eye-witness and he is also the complainant in the case, who is son of Gurmez (deceased) while brother of Manpreet Singh (deceased); that he has turned hostile and has submitted that he has not seen who has fired the shot on the spot. Besides this, he did not identify the present applicant in dock identification; that no specific role was assigned to the applicant in the FIR or in the chargesheet and other three co-accused have already been granted bail. 7. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application. He would submit that the vehicle of the applicant was recovered from the site of the incident. 8. To this, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that since the applicant was not identified by the complainant, who happens to be the son and brother of the deceased, therefore, no case is made out against the applicant and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the only eye-witness in the case has turned hostile and has refused to identify the applicant and other co-accused have already been released on bail, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 10. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. (Alok Mahra J.) 30.04.2026 Ujjwal