IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated : Nainital the 04th December, 2008 Criminial Bail Application No.748 of 2008 Order on the bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE 1. Vikki S/o Madan 2. Rajpal 3. Biram Singh ….Applicants Verus State of Uttarakhand ….Opposite Party Arising out of Criminal Case No. 833 of 2004 Under Section : 364, 302, 201 I.P.C. P.S. Laksar District Haridwar Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate with Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate for the applicants and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. G.A. for the State. Perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that initially the case was Investigated by the police and a find report was submitted before the court concerned; feeling aggrieved against the final report, a protest petition was filed by Kali Ram-complainant in which it was ordered to register a complaint case vide order dated 23.01.2002; thereafter the statements of Kali Ram, Jal Singh and Karan Singh were recorded on 07.02.2002 and the statements of kashi Ram and Nathhu Lal were recorded on 21.02.2002; Jal Singh and Nathhu Lal have stated in their statements that they saw applicant-Rajpal and two other persons throwing the body of a boy into Ban-Ganga river in the night of 26.08.1998 and on the next day the dead body of a boy was recovered from there; thereafter the Magistrate on his appreciation dismissed the complaint; feeling aggrieved by this the complainant preferred a revision before incident; Nakli ram has stated that the extra-judicial confession was made before him by the applicants; an affidavit dated 24.08.2001 of Jal Singh was submitted before the Investigating Officer in which Jal Singh has taken contra-stand against the statement recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C; the incident took place in the year 1998; the statements under section 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded after about four years of incident; and the statements of Mange Ram and Nakli Ram were recorded in the year 2004 after about six years of incident. It was further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the aforesaid evidence cannot be believed at this stage. Learned Addl. G.A. for the State refuted the contention. After due consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties; perusal of the contents of the FIR; after going through the evidence on record, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of view that it is a fit case for bail. Let the applicants-accused be released on bail one executing a personal bond each and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) Dated 04.12.2008 LSR