Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1410/2026 of SAURAV Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 18 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1410/2026 Saurav --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned
UKHC010144562026
2026:UHC:7433
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1410/2026
Saurav
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Ms. Sweta Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Present applicant Saurav S/o Balam Nath is praying for bail in reference to Range Case No. 1/2026-27 wherein the applicant is implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 2, 9, 39, 50, 51, 57 of Wildlife Protection Act P.S. Chiriyapur Range, Haridwar.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and is languishing in jail since 05.05.2026. He further submits that all the offences are triable by the Magistrate and co-accused, namely, Pankaj has already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present applicant is on the same footing and, as such, is entitled to get benefit of parity.
5. On the other side, Ms. Sweta Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State has not disputed that the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail and case of the applicant is on the same footing and therefore he can be given benefit of parity.
UKHC010144562026
2026:UHC:7433
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the co-accused with similar role has been enlarged on bail and all the offences are triable by the Magistrate, therefore this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant ‘Saurav’ 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.) 18.08.2026. Parul