Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 692 (UTT)

KABUL SINGH ALIAS KAWAL SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

ABA/8/2025 · 2025-06-23

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:5285 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA No. 8 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. M.K. Ray and Mr. Harsh Taneja, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Kabul Singh @ Kawal Singh’ is praying for anticipatory bail in relation to First Information Report dated 13.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 231 of 2024 P.S. Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the present applicant along with six others were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Two other co- accused Gurjashan Deep Singh @ Jashandeep Singh and Rakhbeer Singh were granted interim bail. 5. Apart from this, he also further submits that the anticipatory bail of the four other co-accused Khushkaram Singh, Sukhvinder Singh @ Sakkhi, Shamsher Singh and Baljeet Singh @ Bali have also been rejected by this court. 6. He submits that since the other co-accused have already been granted interim bail in anticipatory bail application and no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail. 7. On the other side, Mr. Siddhartha Singh, learned A.G.A. seriously oppose the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the applicant is still absconding and he never cooperate with the investigation, therefore, he does not deserve for anticipatory bail. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into 2025:UHC:5285 consideration that the present applicant is still absconding, therefore, I do not find any merit in the instant anticipatory bail application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 23.06.2025 PR