IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal First Bail Application No.1092 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Smt. Urmila ……….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.145/09 U/Ss 363/366/372 IPC, P.S. Kankhal, Distt. Haridwar Dated: November 20, 2009 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.S. Parihar, learned Brief Holder for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the incident was said to be taken place on 10.5.2009 at 7:00 PM but the FIR was lodged on 2.7.2009 at P.S. Kankhal and the delay in lodging the FIR has not been explained by the prosecution. He further argued that the role of the present applicant is on similar footing with that of co-accused Pawan who has been released on bail by the order of In-charge Sessions Judge, Haridwar dated 29.10.2009 and thus the applicant also deserves bail on the basis of parity. He further submitted that the applicant is a lady and she is also having her four years child in the jail along with her and she is also sick and ailing from diseases. After considering all the facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the contents of the FIR and other material on record, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let the applicant-Smt. Urmila be released on bail on her executing personal bond and also on furnishing two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Haridwar. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 20.11.2009 Rajeev Dang