Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9688 (UTT)

GAURAV RATHOR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/1361/2025 · 2025-08-04

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 BA1 No. 1361 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. and Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant Gaurav Rathor, s/o Shri Jagdish Rathor is praying for bail in relation to FIR dated 21.04.2025, bearing FIR No. 118 of 2025, registered at P.S. Haldwani, District Nainital wherein the present applicant and other co-accused were implicated and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 271, 336(3), 338, 340, 318(4) of BNS 2023 read with Section 60(1), 60(2), 62 and 69(b) of Excise Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated which is evident from the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR. Apart from this, he submits that other co-accused, namely, Sachin Jaiswal and Sonu Kashyap have already been granted bail by this Court on 22.07.2025 in BA1 No. 812 of 2025 and BA1 847 of 2025. Mr. Pandey, learned counsel also submits that charge sheet has already been filed and during investigation applicant’s name came into light and, since, now charge sheet has been filed, as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. 5. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. with Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the State have not disputed this fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and other two co-accused, namely, Sachin Jaiswal and Sonu Kashyap who were named in the FIR have already been enlarged on bail. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the charge sheet has already been filed and other two co-accused who were named in the FIR have already been enlarged on bail this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Gaurav Rathor be released on bail on this executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 04.08.2025 Parul