Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 9 June, 2023
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Second Bail Application No. 83 of 2023
Aakash
........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
........Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Ranjan Ghildiyal, AGA with Ms. Meena Bisht, Brief
Holder for the State.
First Bail Application No. 1076 of 2023
Sagar @ Gola
........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
........Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Ranjan Ghildiyal, AGA with Ms. Meena Bisht, Brief
Holder for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Since, both the bail applications arise out of one and the same FIR, they are heard together and being decided by this common order.
2. The applicants Aakash and Sagar @ Gola are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 0208 of 2022 dated 01.07.2022, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 411, 392, 34 IPC, P.S. Kankhal, District Haridwar.
2
3. Deceased Rohit went missing from 17.06.2022. A missing report was lodged. It is the case of the police that on 01.07.2022, when the applicant Akash was intercepted, a phone which the deceased was carrying at the time of missing was recovered from him. It is further the police case that, on interrogation, the applicant Aakash revealed that it is he, who killed the deceased for looting the e-rikshaw battery. Further, according to the prosecution, the battery of e-rikshaw was recovered from an open place at the instance of the applicant Sagar @ Gola.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant Aakash would submit that there is no evidence against the applicant; the statement of Adesh Kumar is not reliable because initially he tells the Investigating Officer that on 17.06.2022 the deceased had taken his e-rikshaw and phone, but subsequently the statement of Adesh Kumar was improvised to reveal as if he purchased the mobile phone and had given it to the deceased. It is argued that, according to Adesh Kumar, CCTV footages were seen by him on 17.06.2023, whereas the printout of the CCTV footages would show that it is of 30.06.2022.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant Sagar @ Gola would submit that he was named by the co-accused Aakash; allegedly battery was recovered at his instance 3 from an open field; it is not connected with the crime, in any manner.
6. Learned State Counsel would submit that the deceased was carrying mobile phone of Adesh Kumar, which was given to him by Adesh Kumar and it was recovered from the applicant Aakash. It is also argued that the applicants killed the deceased for looting his e-rikshaw battery, which was recovered from an open field at the instant of the applicant Sagar @ Gola.
7. On being asked as to how the battery is connected with crime, learned State Counsel has no reply.
8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
9. The bail applications are allowed.
10. Let the applicants be enlarged on bail on their executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, by each of them, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 09.06.2023 Avneet/