Vikas Pal Alias Murga v. State of Uttarakhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

24TH FEBRUARY, 2026

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 115 of 2026

Vikas Pal alias Murga

.....Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand

..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Saurav Adhikari,

Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey,

Assistant Government

Advocate with Mr. Devender

Singh, Assistant Government

Advocate assisted by Mr.

Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief

Holder.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

Applicant-Vikas Pal alias Murga is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 109(1) read with Section 3 (5), Section 309 (4) and Section 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.49 of 2025, registered at Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar.

¶2According to the First Information Report, on

01.02.2025, Smt. Anju, sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the informant saw that Rakesh, the brother of the informant, was lying on the ground covered in blood.

The First Information Report was registered against the unknown person.

¶3The prosecution has examined Smt. Anju

(PW2). She has stated that she had seen the CCTV footage. One person's face was clearly visible in the CCTV footage but the faces of the other individuals were not clearly visible. In the CCTV footage, they were using the name Rohit and other names to refer to one another.

¶4Heard Mr. Saurav Adhikari, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶5Mr. Saurav Adhikari, Advocate, has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was not involved in the alleged offence. CCTV camera was not installed at the scene of the incident. CCTV camera was installed nearby. Applicant is not convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Nainital, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Rohit Pal alias Chotu, co-accused of similar role, has already been granted regular bail in First Bail Application No.5 of 2026, and, the applicant is in custody since 05.02.2025.

¶6Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application orally.

¶7Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

¶8Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

¶9The Bail Application is allowed.

¶10Let the applicant-Vikas Pal alias Murga be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

___________________

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Date: 24.02.2026 JKJ/Pant