IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 20th day of February 2008 Criminal Bail Application No. 150 of 2008 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Pradeep S/o Kabaj, R/o Village Asgarpur, P.S. Khanpur, District Haridwar. ... Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------ Opposite party ______________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 301 of 2007 U/Ss. 302/201/202/404 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that complainant Ishwar Chand has lodged the report against accused Amit for committing the murder of his son Sandeep alias Pintu. The said incident was said to be taken place on 22.11.07. With the same averments, the F.I.R. was lodged by Ishwar Chand, father of the deceased on 22.11.2007 at 06:00 P.M. in P.S. Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the statement of the complainant Ishwar Chand was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 24.12.2007, in which Ishwar Chand has stated that he has a doubt that Ranveer Gujjar and Afjal had committed the murder of his son. He has further submitted that Ranveer Gujjar was arrested by the police on 28.12.2007 and in the police custody Ranveer Gujjar has given the statement that he and Afjal had committed the murder of Sandeep alias Pintu and after committing the murder, the Mobile which they were looted from Sandeep alias Pintu they had given to the present applicant. He has further submitted that when the applicant was arrested by the police on 4.01.2008, then the said Mobile was said to be recovered from the possession of the applicant. He has further submitted that the Mobile, which was said to be recovered from the possession of the applicant is not identified, that was the same Mobile which was looted by Ranveer Gujjar from Sandeep alias Pintu. Learned brief holder for the State has submitted that that except the recovery of the Mobile there is no other evidence against the present applicant collected by the I.O. during the course of the investigation. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has got no criminal history before this case. He has further submitted that the matter is related to circumstantial evidence and the chain of the circumstances has not been completed against the present applicant. After considering all the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let applicant Pradeep be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Haridwar. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 20.02.2008 Arti