IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 10th day of March, 2010 Ist Bail Application No. 290 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Mahak Singh .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Crime/FIR No. 227/2009, U/s 302, 307, 120-B/34, 212 IPC, PS Ranipur, District Haridwar. _______________________________________________________________ March 10, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State. Heard. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant argued that the accused applicant is not named in the FIR and he is not cited as a conspirator. He further submitted that no evidence has been collected by the I.O. to connect him with the said crime. Learned Brief Holder for the State submitted that the name of the accused applicant came into light on the basis of the statement of co-accused Narendra. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant further argued that co-accused Anil @ Vikas has been granted bail vide order dated 17.12.2009 and another co-accused Ravi @ Ranveer has also been granted bail vide order dated 16.12.2009 passed by this Court and the present accused applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity. 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 Mahak Singh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing of two sureties, each in like amount, to the satisfaction of CJM, Haridwar. Bail application is allowed accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 10.3.2010 PRABODH 2