High Court · 2025

BA 2 / 9 8 / 2 0 2 5 H o n ' b l e Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J. ( Th r o u g h V.C.) 1. Mr. Lalit Sharm a, lear ned counsel wit h Ms. Suraiya Naaz, learned counsel for t he applicant . 2. Mr. Siddhart h Bisht , lear ned A.G.A. For t he St at e. This is t he second bail applicat ion 3. m oved on behalf of t he present applicant Mohd. Saheem , S/ o Saleem , seeking bail t o FI R dat ed 20.12.2024, bearing FI R No. 620 of 2024, regist ered at P.S. Rudrapur Dist rict Udham Singh Nagar wher ein t he present applicant has been char ge sheet for t he offences punishable under Sect ion 318( 4) read wit h Sect ion 61( 2) of BNS 2023. 4. First bail applicat ion was m oved by t he pr esent applicant and anot her co- accused Mohd. Shariq which was rej ect ed on 21.03.2025. First bail applicat ion was rej ect ed prim arily on t he ground t hat t he invest igat ion st ill t her efore, at t his st age if t he applicant is enlar ged on bail it will cert ainly affect t he ent ire invest igat ion. Now, t he second bail applicat ion has 5. been m oved on several grounds and one of t he ground is t hat anot her co- accused, nam ely, Naeem was grant ed bail by t he Trial Court on 07.05.2025 t hat t oo aft er rej ect ion of t he fir st bail applicat ion of t he present applicant . The anot her ground is t hat so far as t he pr esent applicant is concer ned, is already com plet ed and t he charge sheet has been filed on 18.02.2025, and t his fact was not brought t o t he k nowledge of t his Court while r ej ect ing t he first bail applicat ion, and, as a m at t er of fact , char ge sheet was already filed before t he rej ect ionof first invest igat ion t he t he t hat t here hist ory against t hat as per t hat crim inal bail applicat ion. Apart from t his, learned counsel for 6. t he applicant subm it s t he prosecut ion m ain accused is one Gurvinder who has not been arrest ed so far and t he invest igat ion against him is going on. Next ground t he applicant has no previous invest igat ion has already been com plet ed against t he applicant , t herefor e, at t his is no need of cust odial j unct ur e int errogat ion of t he applicant . Last ly, it is argued t hat t he offences in which t he applicant is charge sheet ed are t riable by t he Magist rat e. 7. On t he ot her side, Mr. Bisht , lear ned A.G.A. for t he St at e has not disput ed t his applicant invest igat ion has already been com plet ed and charge sheet has been filed, and, furt herm or e, has not disput ed t his fact t hat co- accused, nam ely, Naeem has already been enlarged on bail by t he Trial Court and he also subm it s t he in w hich applicant has been offences char ge sheet ed are t he Magist rat e. 8. Aft er hearing t he argum ent s of t he learned counsel for t he part ies and t aking int o considerat ion t hat t he char ge sheet has already been filed against t he present applicant and ot her co- accused has already been enlarged on bail by t he Trial Court and offences in which t he applicant has been charge sheet ed are t riable by t he Magist rat e, t his Court is of t he view t hat t he applicant deserves for bail. 9. Accordingly, wit hout ex pressing any opinion on t he m erit s of t he case, t he bail applicat ion is allowed. 10. Let t he applicant Mohd. Saheem be released on bail on his execut ing a per sonal bond and fur nishing t wo reliable sur et ies of t he sat isfact ion of t he court concerned. I t is m ade clear t hat aft er being 11. released on bail t he applicant shall j oin t he like am ount t riable by t hat t he t o wit hout seeking t rial court proceeding on each and every dat e unnecessary adj our nm ent and if he is found indulge in any such act ivit y t he t rial court is free t o t he t ake applicant including cancellat ion of bail. im m ediat e against act ion ( Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J.) 1 1 .0 9 .2 0 2 5 Parul