IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION (1) Criminal First Bail Application No.1094 of 2009 1. Dhan Singh 2. Virendra Singh ……….Applicants (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party WITH (2) Criminal First Bail Application No.1086 of 2009 1. Raghuveer Singh 2. Jagmohan ……….Applicants (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Order on the Bail applications of the accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Both bail applications arising out of Case Crime No.3638/09 U/Ss 364/120-B IPC, P.S. Kirti Nagar (Kotwali), Distt. Tehri Garhwal Dated: December 4, 2009 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Since both the bail applications relate to the common case crime number and all the applicants-accused also accused in the common FIR and incident in both the applicants is also one and the same, hence both the applications are being disposed of by this common order. Heard Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that before lodging of the present FIR, the complainant Sarojini Devi had lodged an FIR at P.S. Kirtinagar on 16.9.2009 with the averments that her son Rakesh Kukreti had gone from the house on 10.9.2009 for Srinagar but when he did not come back, then the missing report was lodged by her, and that report has been annexed as Annexure No.CA1 to the counter affidavit filed by the State. He further stated that again on 20.9.2009, the same complainant Sarojini Devi lodged another report stating therein that Ravindra and Digamber Singh Chauhan had last seen her son Rakesh Kukreti on 10.9.2009 along with the applicants-accused. Thereafter, complainant’s son Rakesh Kukreti did not come back. He further submitted that there is only last seen evidence against the applicants and the matter relates to circumstantial evidence. Further, the chain of the circumstance is not complete against the applicants so as to connect them with the crime. It was further submitted that the applicants are in jail since 20.9.2009 and they have got no criminal history before this case and the trial has yet not been started. After considering all the facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the contents of the FIR and also on perusal of the FIRs dated 16.9.2009 and 20.9.2009 as well as the counter affidavit field by the State and other papers available in file, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicants deserve bail at this stage. Let each of the applicants, namely, Dhan Singh, Virendra Singh, Raghuveer Singh and Jagmohan be released on bail on each of their executing personal bonds and also on their furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Tehri Garhwal. Both the bail applications are disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 04.12.2009 Rajeev Dang