Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9005 (UTT)

RAVINDRA SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA2/203/2025 · 2025-08-13

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:7134 Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2/203/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant Ravindra Singh, S/o Sri Badal Singh, seeking bail in relation to FIR dated 12.12.2013, bearing FIR No. 93 of 2013 registered at P.S. Kathgodam District Nainital wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20/60 of the NDPS Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in fact in this case the applicant was granted bail by this Court on 05.11.2014. He further argued that the trial was commenced but in the meantime, due to covid pandemic, since the applicant belongs to Bihar he left Uttarakhand and shifted to Bihar and thereafter could not get any information with regard to the trial court proceeding. He submits that due to non appearance of the applicant in the trial court proceeding, non bailable warrant was issued and subsequently he was arrested on 08.01.2025 and since then he is in jail. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and his bail was discontinued merely on the ground that he could not appear before the trial court. 5. On the other side, Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State has not disputed this fact that earlier the applicant was granted bail but due to non 2025:UHC:7134 appearance in the trial court proceedings arrest warrant was issued. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the applicant has already been granted bail by this Court in the year 2014 and due to his non appearance in the trial court proceeding non bailable warrant issued and subsequently he was arrested, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail subject to certain conditions. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Ravindra Singh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall join the trial court proceedings on each and every date without seeking any adjournment. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 13.08.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:7134