Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15534 (UTT)

RAVI DIWAKAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/2145/2025 · 2025-12-05

Alok Mahra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:10831 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No.2145 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No.476 of 2025, under Section 3(5), 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) & 352 of B.N.S., registered at Police Station Kotwali Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are wholly baseless and motivated. It is submitted that the applicant is a person of clean antecedents, having no criminal history whatsoever, and that he has been languishing in judicial custody since 23.09.2025. Learned counsel further submits that there is no independent witness to lend corroboration to the prosecution version of the alleged occurrence, and the entire case rests upon interested testimony. It is further argued that in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, no specific role or overt act has been attributed to the applicant. The applicant is a student pursuing his academic career, and his continued 2025:UHC:10831 incarceration will not only cause irreparable harm to his education but will also have a devastating effect on his future prospects. It is thus prayed that, considering the nature of allegations, the absence of any prior criminal antecedents, and the period of custody undergone, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail at this stage. 6. The bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant, namely, Ravi Diwakar be released on bail, on executing personal bond by each one of them and furnishing two reliable sureties by each one of them, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. ( Alok Mah r a, J.) 05.12.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb7 393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987446 351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.12.05 17:28:22 +05'30'