IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal 4th Bail Application No. 1/2009 Order on the bail application of the accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Subhash .…. Applicant (In jail) Versus State …… Opposite Party _________________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No 18 of 2007, U/s 364-A of I.P.C, P.S. Nehru Colony, Dehradun. March 6, 2009 Mr. Sandeep Tandon, Advocate for the applicant/accused. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State. HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. This is the fourth bail application moved on behalf of the applicant/accused who is facing trial in crime no. 18 of 2007 under Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code, P.S. Nehru Colony, Dehradun. First bail application was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 24.10.2007. Thereafter second bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 21.11.2007. Third bail application of the accused was also dismissed on 9.9.2008. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that Shashank alias Bittoo was kidnapped in the morning of 24.1.2007 when he was going to his school. He was only 13 years old when the said incident took place. When the victim Shashank did not return, he was searched by his father M.L. Saklani, but could not be traced out. Thereafter on 25.1.2007, the father of the victim M.L. Saklani received a telephonic ransom demand of Rs.20,00,000/- for release of his son. On 26.1.2007 at 7.30 P.M., someone again rang him up and demanded Rs.30,00,000/- as ransom 2 for releasing his son and threatened that in case of non-payment, he might loose his son forever. With these averments the father of the victim, M.L. Saklani lodged an F.I.R. on 26.1.2007 at 8 P.M. at police station Nehru Colony, Dehradun. Lateron the applicant Shubhash was arrested by the police on 27.1.2007 and since then he is in jail. 3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant-accused submitted that after rejection of the bail applications of the accused Shubhash, the prosecution has examined five witnesses. PW1 ML Saklani, the complainant who has lodged the F.I.R. and who is the father of the victim, has not supported the case and has been declared hostile. PW2 victim Shashank alias Bittoo has also not supported the prosecution version and he too has been declared hostile. PW3 S.I. M.S. Dasoni has also not stated anything material in his deposition against the applicant-accused. PW4 Gautam Verma Prajapati and PW5 Kripal Singh have also not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. Learned Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that now remains no other evidence to be led by the prosecution against the applicant-accused and the witnesses examined by the prosecution has not supported its case before the trial court. He has further submitted that the applicant-accused is in jail since 27.1.2007 and thus he has spent more than two years in jail and whatever evidence led before the trial court by the prosecution has not supported the case made out against the applicant-accused. 3 5. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant deserves bail. 6. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Shubhash be released on bail if he furnishes two sureties and a personal bond of like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Dehradun. 7. However, it is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and bail granted to the applicant shall not affect the trial of the case in any manner. (Dharam Veer, J.) 06.03.2009 PRABODH