Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2470/2025 of ANANTVEER Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 4 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 BA1/2470/2025 Anantveer --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Reema Rana, learned
UKHC010203392025
2026:UHC:6855
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/2470/2025
Anantveer
--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. Ms. Reema Rana, learned Amicus Curiae for the applicant.
2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Present applicant Anantveer, S/o Late Jeet Singh is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 01.01.2025, bearing FIR No. 0001 of 2025 P.S. Ranipur District Haridwar wherein he has been implicated along with six others, namely, Mohit, Nikhil Kumar, Neeraj, Saurah and Vishal (all are residents of State of U.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 2(b)(i)(xi), 3 of U.P. Gangster Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1986.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been implicated under the Gangsters Act on the basis of three cases, i.e., Case Crime No. 383 of 2024, Case Crime No. 23 of 2022 and Case Crime No. 29 of 2022 and in all these cases the applicant is already enlarged on bail. She further submits that two cases relate to the State of U.P. and only one case is in District Haridwar, Uttarakhand, i.e. case crime no. 383 of 2024. She further submits that the present applicant is languishing in jail since last more than one year five months and already suffered long incarceration, therefore, taking into consideration that in another three cases the applicant is already UKHC010203392025
2026:UHC:6855 enlarged on bail, in the present case also the applicant be released on bail.
5. On the other side, Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. have not disputed that in other three cases on the basis of which the applicant has been implicated under the Gangsters Act is on bail.
6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that in all three cases on the basis of which the applicant is implicated under the Gangster Act is already on bail, and the applicant is languishing in jail since last more than one year and five months, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant Anantveer 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 subject to the condition that the applicant after being released on bail shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date and will not indulge in any activity in future and if he found to be indulge in any such activity the prosecution is free to move an application for bail cancellation.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
04-08-2026 Parul