Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7510 (UTT)

SAVEJ v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/983/2025 · 2025-08-05

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:6871 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.983 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Rajendra Singh Azad, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Savej S/o Rashid Ahmad is seeking regular bail in relation to first information report dated 03.11.2024 bearing FIR No.0912 of 2024, Police Station Manglore, District Haridwar, which was lodged against unknown person by one Mohammad Sazid, in which applicant has been charge-sheeted the offences punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and he was arrested on 16.05.2025 and the recovery, as shown, is nothing, but planted one. The complainant is the cousin brother of the applicant and there was some dispute in between family of applicant and complainant. Apart from this, he submits that the charge- sheet has already been file on 19.07.2025, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant and the applicant is having no previous criminal history 5. On the other side, Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State have not disputed that the charge-sheet has already been filed on 19.07.2025 and the applicant is having no previous criminal history. 6. After hearing the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the 2025:UHC:6871 charge-sheet has already been filed on 19.07.2025, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, and, furthermore, the present applicant is having no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant, namely, Savej, 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.) 05.08.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:6871