Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:3642 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
ABA No. 158 of 2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Mehboob Rahi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Shakeel Miya S/o Haseen Miya praying for anticipatory bail in relation to FIR dated 22.01.2026 bearing FIR No. 0011 of 2026 P.S. Pulbhatta, District Udham Singh Nagar which was lodged for the offences punishable under section 309 (4), 317(2) read with Section 3(5) of BNS 2023. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent which is evident from fact that he is not named in the FIR. He further submits that only on the disclosure of his name by the other co- accused the applicant has been implicated. He further submits that other co-accused who have been arrested and also have been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in bail application no. 486 of 2026 and BA1 No. 523 of 2026. He further submits that no TIP was done. 5. On the other side, learned A.G.A for the State on instructions submits that the presence of the present applicant at the time of incident is clearly evident from the CCTV footages and the credible evidence has been collected by the I.O. during investigation and co-accused disclosed his name about his active role in the said crime. He also submits that the applicant have a criminal history of 11 cases in the U.P. and in fact he is a habitual offender in similar type of cases. 6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the applicant actively participated in commission
2026:UHC:3642 of crime, and furthermore he is habitual offender as he is involved in similar nature of cases in the State of U.P., this Court does not find any merit in the instant anticipatory bail application and the same is accordingly dismissed. 7. After dictating the judgment learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is ready to surrender before the court concerned within 72 hours. 8.
In such view of the matter, if the applicant is surrender within 72 hours, before the court concerned no coercive action shall be taken against him. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
13.05.2026 Nahid
2026:UHC:3642