AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alok Mahra, J
Applicant Mahendra Singh Dhanela @ Sonu Singh Dhanela, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 19 of 2025, under Sections 109, 190, 191(3), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of BNS, 2023, registered at P.S. Dwarahat, District Almora, has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case, on 14.08.2025 between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM, Congress candidate Aarti Kirola, along with her brother Deepak Kirola and father Rajendra Singh Kirola, allegedly attempted to influence Kshetra Panchayat members who had voted in favour of the complainant. It is further alleged that when the complainant and his supporters objected, they were abused and threatened. Later, between 3:30 PM and 3:45 PM, after completion of the voting, the present applicant along with co-accused persons and other individuals said to be associated with a criminal gang arrived at the complainant's residence Hotel Apoorva in two vehicles. They allegedly entered the hotel, pointed a firearm at the complainant, and fired shots with the intention to kill him.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the trial court rejected the bail application primarily on two grounds, first, that the applicant was allegedly seen in CCTV footage holding a firearm toward the hotel; and second, that the applicant has a criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the CCTV footage does not depict the applicant aiming a firearm at any specific person. He has further submitted that the applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit detailing all pending and disposed of cases, one case stands quashed on the basis of compromise; in six cases, he has been acquitted; and in the remaining three cases he was neither arrested nor summoned by the police.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been granted bail in all other cases except the present one and is in custody since 16.08.2025. He has further submitted that four co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail, while the remaining three co-accused have been granted regular bail by the Trial Court.
Per contra, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application, submitting that investigation reveals the applicant pointing a firearm toward the hotel, which is reflected in the CCTV footage, and therefore the applicant does not deserve bail.
In view of the above, but, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case for bail.
The bail application is thus, allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.