IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION 3rd Bail Application No. 19 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Faijal .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 12/2010 U/s 302, 394, 201, 411, 120B IPC, PS Haldwani, District Nainital. ___________________________________________________________________ September 8, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Mr. RP Nautiyal, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. First and the second bail applications of the applicant were dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 15.4.2010 and 14.6.2010 respectively passed by this Court. Hence, third bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and even the case against the applicant rests upon the circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against the applicant. He further submitted that the chain of circumstances is not complete against the accused applicant to connect him with the alleged crime. He further argued that the only evidence against the applicant is the statement of Zaved recorded by the I.O. and Zaved himself is a co-accused in this case and his statement recorded under the police custody is not admissible against the accused applicant in evidence as per law. He also submitted that applicant has got no previous criminal history, who is in jail since last more than six months and the trial is yet to begin. Having heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties; perusal of the contents of the FIR and other papers available on record; in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let the applicant Faijal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing of two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of CJM, Nainital. Bail application is allowed accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 8.9.2010 PRABODH 2