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

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1016794

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
ALI MOHAMMAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
BA1 672 / 2025



Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings SL.

Date or directions and COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS No Registrar’s order with Signatures BA1 No. 672 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Ms. Unnati Pant, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. with Mr.

Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3. The present applicant ‘Ali Mohammad’ S/o Mohammad Raj is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 09.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 193 of 2024, P.S. Lalkuan District Nainital, which was lodged against one Shivam Verma for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of BNS, 2023.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and only on the basis of the statement of main accused Shivam Verma, who is named in the FIR, the present applicant has been implicated.

5. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant have no previous criminal history and after investigation now the chargesheet has been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant.

6. On the other side, learned State counsel have not disputed this fact that chargesheet has already been filed. 7. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the chargesheet has already been filed and there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.

8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant ‘Ali Mohammad’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

22.04.2025 PR

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