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

2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 2051

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
MOHD SUHAIL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Mr. Piyush Sammal (through Video Conferencing) and Ms. Sarita Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Addl. Advocate General along with Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for complainant.

4. Applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in connection with F.I.R. No. 51 of 2026 dated 01.04.2026, registered under Sections 351(2), 351(3) and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Banbhulpura, District Nainital.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged alleging that approximately three years prior to the registration of the F.I.R., the applicant allegedly established physical relations with the informant against her will and also recorded a video clip of the said incident. It is further alleged that the applicant thereafter threatened to make the video viral and continued to maintain physical relations with the informant on several occasions. The F.I.R. further states that when the husband of the informant allegedly found the applicant and the informant in a compromising position, the applicant assured the informant that he would marry her

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top