IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 30th day of June, 2010 Ist Bail Application No. 618 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Subash .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 25/2010, U/s 302/34, 201/34 IPC, PS Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee, District Haridwar. _______________________________________________________________ June 30, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It was further argued that the case against the applicant rests upon the circumstantial evidence and the I.O. has not collected any evidence to connect him with the alleged crime and the chain of circumstances is not complete to connect the applicant with the alleged crime. Contrary to it, learned Addl. GA for the State argued that last seen evidence has been collected by the I.O. against the accused applicant. 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 Subash be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing of two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of JM, Roorkee. Bail application is allowed accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 30.6.2010 PRABODH