2026:UHC:658 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Anticipatory Bail Application No.43 of 2026 Ramkumar & 03 Others ...... Applicants Vs. State of Uttarakhand ..... Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present: Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel (through V.C.) for the applicants Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy A.G. with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated: 29.01.2026 Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. This is anticipatory bail application moved by the applicants Ramkumar, Gurpreet, Sandeep and Aashish in FIR No.0016 of 2026 relating to offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 74 of B.N.S., Police Station Khanpur, District Haridwar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the alleged incident is said to have been committed on 11.01.2026 whereas the impugned FIR has been lodged after a delay of 06 days for which no satisfactory explanation has been furnished by the complainant. He further submits that the impugned FIR is nothing but a counter blast to the FIR lodged by applicant no.1 against the complainant on 12.01.2026. It is also submitted that 2 the FIR has been lodged with ulterior motive of falsely implicating the applicants and that there is no element of criminality. 3. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposes the application but he does not dispute the fact that there are cross-cases registered against both the parties, arising out of the same incident, and that the applicant no.1 had already lodged an FIR prior to lodging of the impugned FIR in respect of the same incident. 4. Considering the entire conspectus of things and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed that, in the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with two sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer (“IO”). In addition to it, the applicants shall also comply with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall co-operate in the investigation. 3 (ii) The applicants shall not approach any witness/victim in any manner, whatsoever. (iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court. (iv) The applicants shall deposit their passport with the Investigating Officer (“IO”). The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicants do not have passport, they shall give an undertaking to that effect to the IO. (v) The applicants shall also give an undertaking on above-stated condition no.(i), (ii) & (iii). (vi) It is made clear that, in case, applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions imposed upon them, the prosecuting agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the Anticipatory Bail. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) Vacation Judge 29.01.2026 Rajni RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448ac 3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF4 FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158A0 A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2026.01.29 15:41:16 +05'30'