Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5012 (UTT)

MUKESH KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/613/2025 · 2025-04-16

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:2758 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 613 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Aklema Parveen, learned Legal Aid counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned AGA and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Mukesh Kumar is in judicial custody since 24.03.2024 and seeking bail in relation to FIR/Case Crime No.01 of 2021, registered on the basis of FIR dated 21.01.2021 at Police Station Rajasva Upnirakshak, Shetra-Panti, Narayanbaggad, District Chamoli Garhwal, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 409 and 420 IPC. After investigation, the charge-sheet has filed against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Section 409, 420, 467 and 468, IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that out of the amount so embezzled, the applicant already deposited a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakh Only) and apart from this, the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant and the trial has been commenced. 5. On the other side, learned State counsel submits that after collecting credible evidence, the charge-sheet has been filed, however, he has not disputed this fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed and therefore at this juncture, 2025:UHC:2758 there is no need of the custodial interrogation of the applicant. 6. After hearing the arguments, as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the charge-sheet has already been filed and as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant, namely, Mukesh Kumar, be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 16.04.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:2758