Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1293 (UTT)

SAJID SHAH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/66/2025 · 2025-03-20

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:1998 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/66/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Shankar Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant- Sajid Shah is in judicial custody since 27.08.2024 in relation to Case Crime No. 0444 of 2024 arising out of FIR dated 18.07.2024 registered at P.S. Patel Nagar, District Dehardun wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 and 120B IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, and, in fact, in the agreement to sell he was only the witness of the purchaser. He further submits that other co-accused were already enlarged on bail and he claims parity. In addition to this, he also submits that the investigation has already been concluded and the charge sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. Apart from this, he submits that earlier applicant has also been implicated in three cases, however, in all three cases he is on bail. 5. On other side, Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. has not disputed this fact that other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail and in this particular case charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial 2025:UHC:1998 interrogation of the applicant. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, and further taking into consideration that the charge sheet has already been filed and there is no need of custodial interrogation, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Sajid Shah be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 9. It is made clear that if the applicant is found to be indulged in any such activity in future then the prosecution is free to move bail cancellation application and also apprise the Trial Court. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.03.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:1998