IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 18th day of January, 2010 Ist Bail Application No. 28 of 2010 Order on the Bail Application: CRIMINAL SIDE Smt. Vimla W/o Shri Biram Pal R/o Village Dossni, P.S. Kotwali Laksar District Harid war. ………… Applicant Versus tate of Uttarakhand ………… Opposite Party S Arising out of Crime No. 239 of 2009 Under Sections: 304-B, 201 of I.P.C. Police Station: Kotwali Laksar District: Haridwar. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. Rejendra Singh, Advocate present for the applicant. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder present for the respondent State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant Smt. Vimla, who is in jail in connection with crime No. 239 of 2009, relating to offences punishable under Section 304-B and 201 of I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar, has sought her release on bail. Learned counsel for the application submitted that the applicant had enmity with the witnesses. It is argued on behalf of the applicant that ingredients of offence punishable under Section 304-B are not made out. A perusal of the first information report and the statement of witnesses show that there is specific role of the present applicant in the commission of crime. The postmortem report suggests that cause of death is throttling. There are eyewitnesses who have seen the applicant beating the deceased. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve bail. The bail application is rejected. [ ( Prafulla.C. Pant, J. ) Vacation Judge Dt. 18.01.2010 H.Negi