Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8196 (UTT)

VINEET SHARMA ALIAS CHEENU PANDIT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BAST 8/1/2025 · 2025-07-09

Ravindra Maithani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D- 36 BAST 8 No. 01 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Divya Jain, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Rawat, AGA for the State. Ms. Sadaf, Advocate for the victim. The applicant Vineet Sharma alias Cheenu Pandit is in judicial custody in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 2017 in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 115 of 2017 dated 07.05.2016, under Sections 302, 34 IPC and Section 5/27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar. The short term bail application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that the mother of the applicant, who is old, has to undergo a surgical procedure. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the mother of the applicant is a woman of 65 years of age; she has to undergo a surgical procedure; there is no other male member to look after his mother, therefore, the applicant may be granted short term bail for a period of forty- five days. A supplementary affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the applicant. It reveals that apart from the wife of the applicant, who is forty years of age, the wife of the brother of the applicant is also in the family, who can look after the mother of the applicant. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is not a case fit for grant of short term bail to the applicant. The short term bail application deserves to be rejected. The short term bail application is rejected. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 09.07.2025 Avneet/