2025:UHC:10592 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.1680 of 2025 28th November, 2025 Chand --Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand --Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Rajveer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned DAG for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Applicant Chand, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 752 of 2024, under Sections 309(6)/333/3(5)/109 of B.N.S., registered at P.S. Laksar, District Haridwar, has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The main contention of the applicant is that he was arrested on 26.07.2024. He is not named in the FIR, which itself was lodged with a delay of three days. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment rendered in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine 2025:UHC:10592 2 SC 2356, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: “56. In conclusion, it is held that: i) The constitutional mandate of informing the arrestee the grounds of arrest is mandatory in all offences under all statutes including offences under Penal Code, 1860 (now BNS 2023); ii) The grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing to the arrestee in the language he/she understands; iii) In case(s) where, the arresting officer/person is unable to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing on or soon after arrest, it be so done orally. The said grounds be communicated in writing within a reasonable time and in any case at least two hours prior to production of the arrestee for remand proceedings before the magistrate. iv) In case of non-compliance of the above, the arrest and subsequent remand would be rendered illegal and the person will be at liberty to be set free.” 5. On perusal of the arrest memo, it is evident that no grounds of arrest have been mentioned therein. It is the specific case of the accused that at the time of arrest, and even prior to his production before the Magistrate, the grounds of arrest were not communicated to him either orally or in writing. Hence, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State fairly admits the above position. 7. In view of the aforesaid and without expressing 2025:UHC:10592 3 any opinion on the merits of the case pending before the Trial Court, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for grant of bail. 8. 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. [[ (Alok Mahra, J.) 28.11.2025 BS BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eac bf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185 F418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.11.28 18:26:59 +05'30'