IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINNITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 19th day of August, 2010 II Bail Application No. 108 of 2009 Order on the Bail application CRIMINAL SIDE Sant Ram S/o Sri Atru R/o Village Karanpur Police Station Khanpur District Haridwar ….. Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand through its Secretary Home, Dehradun. ……Opposite party _____________________________________________________ Arising out of Crime No. 129/2009 Under Sections : 302, 504, 506/34 of IPC Police Station: Laksar District: Haridwar. _____________________________________________________ Hon’ble Prafulla C.Pant,J. Mrs. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate, present for the applicant. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Govt, Advocate, with Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder, present for respondent State. Applicant Sant Ram, who is in jail in connection with crime No. 129 of 2009, relating to offences punishable under Section 302, 504, 506 /34 of I.P.C., police station Laksar, District Haridwar, has sought his release on bail. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The first bail application was rejected by this court vide its order dated 17.09.2009, as the applicant withdrew the bail application. The new ground in the bail application, pressed on behalf of the applicant is that, since the first bail application was rejected, P.W. 1 Mahabir Singh, P.W. 2 Anchal Kumar, P.W.3, P.W.4 Ombir and P.W. 5 Sudhir Kumar have been examine. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that P.W. 1 Mahabir, though supported the prosecution story in examination-in-chief, but in cross-examination admitted that he was far away from the place of incident, at the time when shots were fired at the deceased. P.W. 2 Anchal Kumar did not support the prosecution story, and was declared hostile. It is contended that P.W. 5 Sudhir Kumar also did not support the prosecution story, and declared hostile. It is further pointed out that P.W. 4 Ombir is a formal witness, and he too is declared hostile. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that co- accused Sardara, with similar role, has already been granted bail on 12.08.2010, by this court. In view of the above development, after rejection of the first bail application, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail. The second bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Sant Ram be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. (Urgency Application No. 3391 of 2010 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla.C.Pant,J.) 19.8.2010 H.Negi