IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 28th day of December, 2011 First Bail Application No. 1144 of 2011 Criminal Side Yogesh Sharma @ Mooli S/o Shri Mahesh Chandra Sharma R/o 202, Kaila Dehat P.S. Vijay Nagar, Distt. Ghaziabad (U.P.) ……...Applicant ( in Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …..….Opposite Party Arising out of crime no. 146 of 2011 Under Section: 302 and 120B IPC Police Station Kotwali Haridwar District Haridwar -________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. S.P.S. Panwar, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. H.C. Pathak, Advocate, present for the applicant. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder, present for the State. Applicant- Yogesh Sharma @ Mooli who is in jail in connection with crime no. 146 of 2011, relating to offences punishable under section 302 and 120B IPC, Police Station Kotwali Hardwar, District Hardwar, has sought his release on bail. Heard learned counsel for the parties. -2- It is a case of circumstantial evidence. During investigation it is said to have been found that co- accused Sudha Sharma with fake name “Inku” stayed in the fateful night with the deceased in Hotel Himalaya, Hardwar. She slipped from the room in the mid night. Next day deceased (Sudhir Kumar) found murdered in the room. A FIR relating to offence punishable under section 302 IPC was lodged by the Manager of the hotel against Inku (Sudha Sharma). Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is neither named in the FIR, nor had any enmity with the deceased, nor stayed in the hotel in the night in which murder is said to have been committed. Learned counsel for the State submitted that applicant stayed in the hotel in the name of Rakesh. But perusal of the Annex. 9 (copy of the register of the hotel) shows that the person Rakesh stayed in room no. 304 after he arrived at 8:35 P.M., on 23.04.2011. The murder had already taken place a day before. It is pleaded on behalf of the applicant that assuming for a moment that Rakesh was Yogesh, even then he had no reason to go to the hotel on the next day, with third person named Revti. As to the CCTV recording, it is pointed out that witnesses have stated it were only the Inku @ Sudha Sharma, and the deceased who -3- were seen in the CCTV recording. In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail. The bail application is allowed. Let applicant Yogesh Sharma @ Mooli 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, Hardwar. (Application CRMA no. 1579 of 2011, stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Parul 28.12.2011