IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Ist Bail Application No.323 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Dilshad S/o Abdul Rashid @ Munne R/o Village Umrukhurd, Thana-Khatima District Udham Singh Nagar ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: April 5, 2010 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of FIR No.188 of 2009 Under Section 364-A of IPC P.S. Khatima, District U.S. Nagar ________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Mahavir Singh Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and also perused the record. In brief, the prosecution story is that the son of the complainant Mohd. Usman was missing since 21.9.2009 and the missing report of the same was given in the police station. Same day in the night, the complainant received a call on his mobile by an unknown person who demanded ransom of Rs.2 Lakhs from him. The complainant after paying the money to the kidnappers got released his son. The kidnappers were riding on motorcycle number UP 26 B 1592 and out of them, one was the present applicant/accused Dilshad. With the same averments, the complainant Mohd. Haji Usman lodged the FIR on 24.09.2009 at P.S. Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. On 25.9.2009, the applicant along with other co-accused persons were arrested by the Police and from the possession of the present applicant, Rs.30,000/- was recovered. Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has argued that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the said case due to enmity. Contrary to this, learned Addl. GA for the State has argued that the applicant/accused alongwith other co-accused kidnapped Mohd. Kaif, aged about 6 years, through a motorcycle, which was registered in the name of father of the applicant/accused. He further argued that the victim was got released from the possession of the applicant/accused by giving ransom money. After that when the applicant along with other co-accused persons was arrested by the Police then from his possession Rs.30,000/- and the motorcycle which was used in the said crime was recovered. Perusal of the contents of the FIR; recovery memo and other papers available on record, prima facie indicates that the accused/applicant alongwith other co-accused kidnapped Mohd. Kaif, a minor boy, aged about 6 years, for ransom. After getting money from the father of victim he released the victim and after four days of the said incident when the applicant/accused was arrested by the Police Rs.30,000/- and the motorcycle which was used in the said crime was recovered from his possession. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances and seriousness of the case, the Court is of the view that no case for bail is made out. Bail application is rejected accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 05.04.2010 RG