BA1/639/2024 on 3 July, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/639/2024 on 3 July, 2025

                                                                     2025:UHC:5708
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                  COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               BA1 No. 639 of 2024
                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap, learned Amicus
counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy A.G.
along with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief
Holder for the State.

3. Applicant- Shubham, who is in judicial
custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No.
241 of 2021, under Sections 394, 302, 414, 411,
201 & 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station
Bhadrabad, District Haridwar has sought his
release on bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.

5. As per the FIR, the informant alleged that
his 22-year old son Rohit had gone to Dehradun
on 14.06.2021 for labour work. He left Dehradun
to return to his village on a Bajaj motorcycle
bearing registration number from Uttarakhand
with cash amount of ₹10,000/-. While on the way,
he was in contact with his brother Bhupender
Saini around 7:30 p.m., and mentioned that he had
stopped to collect some clothes. However, Rohit
did not reach home, and his phone was found
switched off. On 15.06.2021, the informant
received a call from the police informing him that
a body had been found in an open field near
Kishanpur. Upon reaching the Government
Hospital, the informant identified the deceased as
his son.

6. Learned counsel for applicant would submit
that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been
implicated in the instant crime. There are no
eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. The only
evidence against the applicant is a CCTV footage
showing the deceased riding as a pillion with the
applicant; however, when the applicant returned
six hours later on foot on the said route, he was
2025:UHC:5708
seen alone in the footage. It is further contended
that the mandatory provisions under Section 65 of
the Evidence Act have not been complied with in
regard to the admissibility of the CCTV footage,
which is only basis for implication of the applicant
in the alleged crime.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant would
further submit that the applicant is in judicial
custody since 19.06.2021 and out of 24
prosecution witnesses, only two witnesses have
been examined so far. Moreover, the co-accused
from whom the deceased’s mobile phone and
motorcycle were recovered has already been
granted bail. The applicant is a permanent resident
of Haridwar, and there is no likelihood of his
absconding or tampering with evidence. Hence, it
is argued that the applicant deserves to be released
on bail.

8. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed
the bail application on the ground of seriousness
of the allegations. However, he fairly conceded
that the applicant has been in custody since
19.06.2021.

9. Having considered the submissions made by
both parties and without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, this Court is of the view
that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

10. Accordingly, the 1st bail application is
allowed.

11. Let the applicant Shubham be released on
bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a
personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court concerned.

[

(Alok Mahra, J.)
03.07.2025
Mamta
2025:UHC:5708