Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1415/2025 of HARIRAJ SAINI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 19 August 2026
2026:UHC:7488
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1415/2025 Hariraj Saini --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Mukul Singh Dangi,
UKHC010121492025
2026:UHC:7488
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1415/2025
Hariraj Saini
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Mukul Singh Dangi, learned counsel for the applicant through Legal Aid.
2. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Exemption application IA No. 1 of 2025 is allowed.
4. The instant bail application is moved on behalf of the present applicant Hariraj Saini, S/o late Sri Mukandi Singh through Legal Aid Counsel praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 30.07.2024 bearing FIR No. 370 of 2024 P.S. Jaspur District Udham Singh Nagar wherein he is implicated and charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS 2023.
5. Learned Legal Aid Counsel submits that the applicant already suffered incarceration of more than two years as he is languishing in jail since 01.08.2024 and the FIR has been lodged by his own daughter with the allegations that applicant always harassed her mother due to which she commit suicide. It is argued that even if the allegation as alleged is taken into consideration, no ingredients for abetment are available to constitute the offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS 2023. Apart from this, he submits that there is criminal antecedent of only one case in which UKHC010121492025
Page 1 of 2
2026:UHC:7488 the applicant is already enlarged on bail. He also submits that there is no substantial progress in the trial and the applicant be released on bail.
6. On the other side, Ms. Rangoli Purohit learned A.G.A. for the State have not disputed that the applicant is languishing in jail since last more than two years and there is no substantial progress in the trial and the conduct of the applicant in jail is also very good as per the instruction of Jail Authority.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.08.2024 and there is no substantial progress in the trial therefore this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant “Hariraj Saini” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
19-08-2026 Parul
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…