BA1/334/2025 of BALKAR SINGH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Parties
- Balkar Singh (PETITIONER)
- State of Uttarakhand (RESPONDENT)
Cited by (1)
Counts citations resolved within this build's own ingested judgment corpus. The true corpus-wide count will be higher until more of the corpus is ingested.
Statutes cited (1)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALFirst Bail Application No.334 of 2025
Balkar Singh
…..….....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
….….Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Arvind Vasistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the informant.
With
First Bail Application No.335 of 2025
Pargat Singh
…..….....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
….….Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Arvind Vasistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the informant.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Since both these bail applications arise from
one and the same FIR, they are being heard together and decided by this common order.
2. The applicants Balkar Singh and Pargat Singh are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.83 of 2024, dated 28.03.2024, under Sections 302, 307, 120-B, 34 IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station
Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the co-accused having similar role has already been granted bail.
5. counsel.
This fact is admitted by the learned State
Learned counsel for the informant would
submit that, in fact, the gun which was used in the offence was mortgaged by one of the co-accused and it is the applicant, who got it released.
7. The Court wanted to know, as to what is the document available in this regard? He would submit that one of the co-accused has stated so.
8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that these are the cases fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
9. The bail applications are allowed.
10. Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount; by each one of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Sanjay
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)05.03.2025