HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated Nainital The 21st July , 2008 1st Bail Application No. 547 of 2008 Order on the application of the accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Parveen Singh ……….. Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ……...... Opposite Party FIR No. 73 of 2008 U/s 302, 201 and 34 I.P.C. Registered on the basis of FIR dated 30/04/2008 Police Station Jaspur District Udham Singh Nagar Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Heard Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate for the applicant; Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate with Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent/State; and perused the record. According to the prosecution the deceased Sunder Singh had been missing since 17/03/2008. His body was recovered from the field on 11/04/2008. Thereafter, a report was lodged on 30/04/2008 after inordinate delay. Learend counsel for the accused/applicant contended that the present accused/applicant was not named in the body of the F.I.R; the missing report was not lodged with the police till the lodging of the F.I.R.; the dead body was recovered on 11/04/2008; the F.I.R. was lodged after inordinate delay on 30/04/2008; the F.I.R. contains averment that the informant was informed by Vimla Devi the mother of the deceased that Nab Bahar and Rinku had taken the deceased with them; Vimla Devi had later on improved her statement by adding the name of the present accused/applicant on 30/04/2008; the statement of the witnesses were recorded on 30/04/2008 after a long gap from the date of the incident; there was sufficient time to the complainant to implicate the present accused/applicant; the present accused/applicant has been falsely implicated after due deliberation; and there is no evidence against the present accused/applicant. The learned G.A. refuted the contention and supported the averments made in the counter affidavit. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case in totality, it is a fit case for bail. Let the accused/applicant Parveen Singh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) Dated 21.07.2008 Shiv