Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8331 (UTT)

SONU v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA2/179/2025 · 2025-06-27

Rakesh Thapliyal

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 JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2 No.179 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Hrindyagam Shah, learned Counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the second bail application moved before the Additional Sessions Judge/FTSC, Haridwar, was already withdrawn on 24.03.2025 and this fact was not disclosed to this Court while moving First Bail Application No.909 of 2025. It is contended that, in Bail Application No.909 of 2025, an impression was given that the second bail application is still pending before the trial Court and in view of such statement, the trial court was directed to decide the pending second bail application. 4. The order dated 24.03.2025 passed by Additional Session Judge/FTSC, Haridwar is placed on record as Annexure No.2. On perusal of this annexure, it reveals that the second bail application was dismissed as not pressed on 24.03.2025. 5. Since the second bail application was dismissed as not pressed, therefore, the applicant can move a third bail application before the trial Court. 6. In view of this, the instant second bail application is dismissed with a liberty to the applicant to move a third bail application before the trial Court. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 27.06.2025 R.Bisht