BA1/83/2025 of FURKAN Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Court: Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date: 2025-09-09
Bench: DISTRICT UDHAM SINGH NAGAR, OTHERS VS STATE OF HARYANA
Case number: 83 of 2025

Parties

State of Uttarakhand (PETITIONER)
Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate. Counsel for the State : Mr. Akshay Latwal, Brief Holder (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

B.S. JOSHI AND ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. (2003)

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

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

16[th ]JANUARY, 2025

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.83 of 2025

Furkan and Another

State of Uttarakhand

..…Applicants

Versus

..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate. Counsel for the State : Mr. Akshay Latwal, Brief Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present Application under Section 483(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed for regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.705 of 2024, registered at Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar.

2. The applicants-Furkan and Sufiyan are in judicial custody for the offence under Sections 303(2), 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.As per the First Information Report, on 18.11.2024, the informant’s sister was going in three wheeler. Someone stole gold and silver jewellery from her bag. The First Information Report was lodged on 10.12.2024. During the course of investigation, the said jewellery were recovered from the possession of the applicants on 13.12.2024.

4. Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for applicants and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

5.Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, has contended that the applicants are innocent persons. They have been falsely implicated in the present matter. Nothing was recovered from their possession. Applicants are not previous convicts, and, they are permanent residents of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no likelihood of their absconding.

6. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally.

7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve bail at this stage.

8.The Bail Application is allowed.

9.Let the applicants, namely, Furkan and Sufiyan, be released on bail on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Dt:16.01.2025 Ravi Bisht

___________________

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (Vacation Judge)