IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION 2nd Bail Application No. 102 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Mangat .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 325/2006, U/s 395, 397, 223, 224, 225, 120B IPC, PS Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar. _______________________________________________________________ August 2, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Mr. Rajesh Pande, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vijay Bhatt, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. First bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 4.12.2009 passed by this Court. Hence, second bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant. In brief, the prosecution case is that Angrej Singh Mukhtyar Singh, Harjinder and Kripal Singh were in the Roorkee Jail in some offence and on the date of the incident i.e. 7.11.2006, these accused persons were being taken from Roshnabad Court, Hardwar to Roorkee Jail and when the vehicle in which these accused persons were being taken reached in between NIH Colony, Beldi Sulfar, 7-8 unknown persons had come on a Tata Sumo and they overtook the said vehicle of the accused and snatched the keys from the driver Rakam Pal and they had managed to get the accused persons namely Angrej Singh, Mukhtyar, Sonu, Harjinder and Kripal Singh rescued along with handcuffs (hathkadis) and rifles. With the same averments, the FIR was lodged on 7.11.2006 at 4.10 pm at PS Roorkee, District Hardwar by Sri Kailash Panwar, SHO, Kotwali Roorkee and a case was registered as Case Crime No. 325/06 u/s 395/397/225/224/223 IPC and u/s 29 of Police Act against 7-8 unknown persons. In the said FIR, it was also stated that behind the Tata Sumo, one Maruti Car 800 was there in which ladies were also there. Later on 5.4.2007, the police had arrested Mukhtyar Singh, Sonu singh, Ratan Kaur and Bachan Kaur from the Skylark Hotel, Nagpur. Accused Angrej Singh had tried to run away and he had also fired upon the police and in defence, the police had also fired upon him and due to the injuries of firearm, Angrej Singh had died and accused Mukhtyar Singh, Sonu Singh, Ratan Kaur and Bachan Kaur were sent to jail in the instant case. State has filed a counter affidavit of SI RK Chauhan, the I.O. of the case, wherein it has been stated that the on the date of incident i.e. on 7.11.2006, the accused persons ran away from the place of occurrence with the help of accused applicant and other co-accused. During the course of investigation, names of the accused came in the light. The accused applicant was caught red handed in a case of theft by Raisen Police (Madhya Pradesh) on 11.8.2007 along with one co-accused Raju @ Veeru. The accused applicant was taken into custody through warrant B and in the abvoesaid case chargesheet was submitted against him. It has been further stated that sufficient evidence has been collected against the accused applicant during the course of investigation and statements of three eyewitnesses i.e. Constable Tajwar Singh, Constable Mohan Thakur and Constable Sulekh Chand were recorded under Section 161 CrPC and they have supported the prosecution case and they have also identified the accused applicant. Having heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties; perusal of the contents of FIR; 2 statements of Const. Tajwar Singh, Const. Mohan Thakur & Const. Sulekh Chand and other papers available on record and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is of the view that at this stage, case under Section 395, 397, 223, 224, 225, 120B IPC is made out against the accused applicant. Hence, keeping in view the seriousness and gravity of offence, I do not find any ground to release the accused applicant on bail at this stage. Hence, the bail application is rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 2.8.2010 PRABODH 3