SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(UK) 14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Kaleem - Applicant 
Versus 
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
First Bail Application No. 444 of 2026
Decided On : 27-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate.

Judicial custody without direct evidence or naming in FIR is insufficient for bail denial; co-accused receiving bail influences decision.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 307, 34, and 120B - Bail application - The applicant, not named in the FIR, implicated through co-accused confessions, has been in custody since 29.05.2018. The court found no compelling reason to deny bail, as co-accused were granted bail and expressed no opinion on case merit. (Paras 2, 8, 10, 11)

(B) Principles for Bail - The need for detention to be justified; mere implication in statements without direct evidence insufficient for denial of bail. (Paras 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was implicated in a homicide by allegations stemming from confessional statements. The key evidence included weapon recoveries associated with co-accused. The applicant has a permanent residence and has been in custody for an extended period without being named in the initial FIR.

Findings of Court:
The applicant was eligible for bail due to the lack of direct evidence against him and the circumstances surrounding other co-accused being granted bail.

Issues: The court addressed whether the applicant should remain in custody despite not being named in the FIR and the implications of the co-accused's confessions.

Ratio Decidendi: Detention for an indefinite period was unjustified given that the applicant was not named in the FIR, and others involved were granted bail, reinforcing the principle of not denying bail without clear evidence.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Table of Content
1. bail application relates to serious charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. details of alleged conspiracy and evidence. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. arguments for and against bail application. (Para 8 , 9)
4. court's decision on bail application. (Para 10 , 11)
5. conditions and consequences of bail. (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Verma, J.

This Application has been filed for regular bail in Case Crime No. 138 of 2018, registered at police station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. The applicant-Kaleem is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Sections 302 , 307 read with Section 34 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The case of the respondent is that on 25.05.2018, the informant Smt. Bhajan Kaur was present in her house with her husband Daya Singh, daughter-in-law Charanjeet Kaur, brother of her daughter-in-law Devendra Singh alias Labba, his wife Babbi and his son Happy. At around 11:00 a.m., two persons entered her house and pointed a country made pistol at her chest. They fired at her husband Daya Singh, aged about 63 years, due to which he died. Devendra Singh alias Labba was also shot, due to which, he received injuries. After inquest proceedings, post-mortem examination and last rites of the deceased, the First Information Report was lodged on 25.05.2018 at 20:30 hrs. The First Information Report was registered against the two unknown persons.

4. The deceased had two sons. One is Jagtar Singh alias Jagga and the name of the other son is Meher Singh. Jagtar Singh alias Jagga’s brother-in-law Devendra Singh alias Labba had enmity with one Gurmukh Singh alias Gorkha. Devendra Singh alias Labba went to jail because of Gurmukh Singh. Devendra Singh alias Labba (co-accused) along with his friend Aleem (co-accused) settled the matter with the co-accused Narender Sharma and Shankar Sharma alias Ravi (co-accused) for rupees ten lakhs to take revenge from Gurmukh Singh. One lakh was given in advance. After the incident, the co-accused Narender Sharma and the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi fled away on a motorcycle, bearing Registration No.UK06-L9443.

5. One empty cartridge was recovered from the possession of the co-accused Narender Sharma at the time of his arrest. A country made pistol 315 bore and a live cartridge were recovered from the possession of the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi. One bullet 315 bore and one empty cartridge 315 bore were recovered from the spot. One bullet 315 bore was recovered from the dead body of the deceased at the time of post-mortem examination. One country made pistol and a pistol 315 bore were recovered at the instance of the co-accused Narender Sharma and the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi. The said motorcycle was recovered from the custody of the co- accused Narender Sharma and the co-accused Shankar Sharma. The bullet recovered from the dead body of the deceased, the bullet and empty cartridge recovered from the spot and the country made pistol, live cartridge and empty cartridge, recovered from the co- accused persons, were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory.

6. The allegation against the present applicant is that he was in jail for another case at the time of the incident and he provided country made pistol through his brother Aleem (co-accused) from the jail.

7. Heard Mr. Vikas Anand, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate General for the respondent.

8. Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate, has contended that the applicant has not been named in the First Information Report. His name has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused Devendra Singh alias Labba and co-accused Narender Sharma. The Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of any jail officials. Co-accused Narender Sharma, co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi, co- accused Devendra Singh alias Labba and the co- accused Aleem have already been granted regular bail by this Court. Applicant is a permanent residen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top