IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 30th day of November 2009 Ist Bail Application No.870 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Umesh Chandra Vinwal S/o Sri Laxmi Dutt Vinwal ….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: November 30, 2009 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.23 of 2009 Under Sections 304-B, 498-A and 201 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Reethasahib, District Champawat ________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri B.D. Kandpal, Advocate for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Bhatt, Additional G.A. for the State and perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the report about the death of Smt. Somti was lodged by Kamlapati Bhatt, father of the deceased, on 19.4.2009 at P.S. Reethasahib, District Champawat. On the basis of this report, the Police have prepared the inquest report on 20.4.2009. Copy of the inquest report is annexed as Annexure No.2 to this bail application. It is argued on behalf of the applicant that there were no allegations against the present applicant and even he was not named in the F.I.R. dated 19.4.2009. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that thereafter on 20.4.2009 second F.I.R. was lodged by the same complainant at P.S. Reethasahib and in that compliant, allegations of demand of dowry was made against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the original F.I.R. dated 19.4.2009 has been suppressed by the police and the second F.I.R. dated 20.4.2009 is based on thought story just to implicate the applicant and even the second F.I.R. is hit by Section 162 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history; he is in jail since 23.4.2009 and the trial of the case has yet not been started. After considering all the facts and circumstances and on perusal of the contents of the F.I.R. dated 19.4.2009 produced before me by learned Addl. G.A. and other papers available in file and hearing learned counsel for the parties, 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 the applicant-Umesh Chandra Vinwal be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Champawat. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 30.11.2009 RG