High Court · 2025

1. Mr. Lalit Sharm a and Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, t he applicant . 2. Mr. Sandeep Shar m a, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e. 3. Mr. Nar endra Bali, learned counsel t he com plainant wit h Ms. Prabha Nait hani, learned counsel. 4. Present applicant - Harsh Meht a, S/ o Manoj Kum ar is praying for regular bail in relat ion 17.03.2025 regist ered as Case Crim e/ FI R No. 174 of 2025 at P.S. Pat hari Dist rict Haridwar t he pr esent applicant and 12 wher ein ot her unk now n per sons including one unk now n per son wer e im plicat ed for t he offences Sect ions 103( 1) , 190, 191( 2) , 191 ( 3) , 61( 2) ( A) of read wit h Sect ion 3( 1) ( r) , BNS 2023 3( 2) ( v) of t he SC/ ST Act and Sect ion 3/ 25 of t he Arm s Act . t he applicant 5. subm it s t hat t he applicant is innocent and has been evident from t he fact t hat in t he incident , which was happened on 16.03.2025 at about 9: 00 t o 9: 30, t he pr esent applicant sust ained grievous m ult iple inj uries on his head, and, t hereaft er he was im m ediat ely adm it t ed in Sr i Swam i Bhum anand Hospit al from w here he was refer red t o S.D. Hospit al Roorkee and from w here he was again r efer red t o AI I MS Rishikesh. He subm it s t hat t he pr esent applicant was brought by one S.I . Aj ay Kum ar fir st ly t o Sri Swam i Bhum anand Hospit al t hen t o Dist rict Hospit al Roorkee and t o AI I MS Rishikesh wher e he was adm it t ed by t he aforesaid S.I . at 2: 55: 58 a.m . on t hat 17.03.2025. He im plicat ed w hich Lear ned counsel furt her subm it s falsely t hen lodged subm it s an FI R was ident ical nam e, Lear ned counsel at P.S. Pat hari, Dist rict t her eaft er 19.03.2025 Haridwar. 6. t he applicant furt her subm it s t hat in fact in t his incident applicant was br ut ally beat en and t o save t hem selves an FI R was lodged on 17.03.2025 wit h t he allegat ion t hat by a gunshot inj ury one per son nam ely Raj an died. He subm it s t hat t he said FI R which was lodged on 17.03.2025 was regist ered as FI R No. 0174 of 2025 at P.S. Pat hari, Dist rict Haridwar. He t hat applicant is not nam ed in t he FI R since applicant ’s nam e is Harsh Meht a, S/ o Manoj Kum ar t hough in t he FI R nam e of i.e, t wo persons wit h Harsh Chaudhary, S/ o Sunil and Harsh Chaudhary, S/ o Babeet Chaudhar y are m ent ioned. 7. Apart from t his, learned counsel for t he applicant subm it s t hat on 15.03.2025 t he applicant cam e from Pat na, Bihar for business purposes since he is doing a business of Sanit ary as a wholesale dealer t erm wit h Jat in Chaudhary and t o recover t he am ount he cam e t o Haridwar. There was ret urn flight t icket of 18.03.2025. 8. On t he previous dat e, t he St at e was direct ed necessary writ t en inst ruct ions, however, since t here was no lodged on inst ruct ion about 19.03.2025, a furt her opport unit y was given t o t he St at e t o get inst r uct ions in inst ruct ion has been t he m at t er. Now, placed befor e t his Court w hich cont ains t he m edical r eport of t he pr esent applicant and on per usal of first m edical report it is clearly evident t hat t he pr esent applicant was brought t o t he hospit al by S.I . Aj ay Kum ar which furt her reflect s t hat inj uries wer e caused by physical assault . Report of t he AI I MS is also placed and on per usal of AI I MS t he applicant was brought by S.I . Aj ay Kum ar t o AI I MS Rishikesh w here t he applicant report also is business t he FI R reveals t her e t hat t o t he t hat t hat t his he subm it s t he ent ire case of was adm it t ed on 17.03.2025 at 2: 55: 58 am . I n addit ion t o t his, t he arr est m em o of t he applicant also placed befor e t his Court and as per t he arrest m em o t he present applicant was shown t o be ar rest ed from near Hanum an Tem ple, Sadan Mar g, I DPL Rishikesh and t im e of t he arrest is show n as 12: 15 pm on 17.03.2025. 9. t he applicant Lear ned counsel subm it s t hat t he arrest , as show n, of t he applicant is false since at 2: 55: 58 am t he applicant was shown t o be adm it t ed in AI I MS Rishikesh by S.I . Aj ay Kum ar. Apart inj uries sust ained by t he present applicant cannot be show n t o be caused due t o collusion of t wo vehicles which is evident from t he inj ury report wherein it has been show n t hat it is caused by phy sical assault . He t he subm it s prosecut ion for im plicat ion of t he applicant appears t o be a false im plicat ion. 10. On t he ot her side, Mr. Narendra Bali, t he com plainant learned counsel subm it s independent wit ness of t he incident w ho is in fact an eye wit ness and t he applicant was present at t he t im e of t he incident r egar ding which t he FI R has been lodged on 17.03.2025, t he present and on point ing out of applicant a count ry- m ade pist ol was recover ed from t he possession of t he co- accused Aryan and he is involved in t he crim e, since t he gunshot inj ury was found on t he body of t he deceased. 11. Mr. Sandeep Shar m a, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e subm it s t hat invest igat ion is st ill going on and t he ot her co- accused Jat in has a crim inal hist ory of six cases, how ever, he has not disput ed t his fact t hat t he applicant has no pr evious crim inal hist ory. He furt her subm it s t hat in fact t he per son, nam ely, Harsh Chaudhary, S/ o Sunil is m ent ioned in t he FI R is t he sam e per son w ho is t he applicant herein and t his fact cam e int o light during invest igat ion. 12. Aft er hearing t he argum ent s of t he t here is a t hat t he applicant and learned counsel furt her t aking int o considerat ion t hat t he applicant also sust ained grievous inj uries on t he m ost vit al part of his body and he was adm it t ed t o t he hospit al by S.I . Aj ay Kum ar him self and last ly t he applicant was adm it t ed in AI I MS Rishikesh at 2: 58: 55 a.m . by t he said S.I . and as per t he m edical report t he inj ury was caused due t o som e phy sical assault and furt her aft er t aking int o considerat ion t hat t he applicant was adm it t ed in AI I MS, how ever, ar rest of t he applicant has been shown at earlier point of t im e w hich is highly im probable , t her efore, t his Court is of t he view t hat t he applicant deserves for bail. 13. Accordingly, wit hout ex pressing any opinion on t he m erit of t he case t he bail applicat ion is allowed. 14. Let t he applicant Har sh Meht a be released on bail on his execut ing a per sonal bond and furnishing t wo suret ies of t he like am ount t o t he sat isfact ion of t he court concerned. 15. I t is m ade clear t hat aft er being released on bail and furt her aft er get t ing m edical fit ness cert ificat ion t he applicant will cooperat e wit h t he invest igat ion and will not leave t he count ry wit hout leave of t he court concerned. ( Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J.) 2 8 .0 4 .2 0 2 5 Parul