IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 1st day of September, 2009 First Bail Application No. 860 of 2009 Criminal Side Santosh Kumar S/o Late Data Ram R/o Village Ameli Patti Maniyarsau Tehsil and District Pauri Gahrwal. ……...Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ……….Opposite Party Arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2009 Under Sections: 302 I.P.C. P.S.: Pauri District: Pauri Garhwal. _____________________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J Heard Shri D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate for the applicant and Shri Amit Bhatt, A.G.A. for the State. Applicant-Santosh Kumar, who is in jail in connection with crime No. 29 of 2009, relating to offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S.: Pauri, District-Pauri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of circumstantial evidence. Applicant is not named in the First Information Report. It is further contended that no recovery is made during investigation, from the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that the applicant is not named even in the dying declaration. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after going through the papers on record, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail. Let the applicant- Santosh Kumar, be released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal. Dt. 01.09.2009 (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) S