Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1048/2026 of ANKUSH SHARMA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 28 July 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1048/2026 Ankush Sharma --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Arvind Vashistha,
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1048/2026
Ankush Sharma
--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. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Mr. Narendra Bali, learned counsel with Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant.
4. Present applicant Ankush Sharma, S/o Late Vasudev Sharma is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 23.04.2026, bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 188 of 2026 P.S. Kotwali Haridwar District Haridwar wherein the present applicant along with one Kamla Devi (Grand-mother of the applicant) and Sachi Sharma, W/o the applicant have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 427, 447, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 read with Section 120B IPC.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and, in fact, the allegation as alleged appears to be civil in nature which is also evident from the fact that civil suit was filed wherein the complainant appeared as a witness. He further submits that as per the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, the grand-mother of the applicant have right to live in the property of the trust, the allegations as alleged in the FIR
does not disclose any offence and the entire dispute is civil in nature. He further submits that the applicant being grandson of Mrs. Kamla Devi have a right to live in the property of the Trust. Apart from this, he submits that the investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has been filed and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 06.05.2026 and has no criminal antecedent, therefore, he be enlarged on bail.
6. On the other side, Mr. Lalit Sharma and Mr. Narendra Bali, learned counsel who appear for the complainant submits that by virtue of will only a right to live in the trust property was given to the grand-mother of the applicant but the present applicant and his wife are indulge to get earning from the trust property which is beyond the scope of the will.
7. Mr. Nainwal, learned A.GA. for the State filed the counter affidavit and submits that after collecting all credible evidences charge sheet has been filed and the investigation reveals that the applicant and his wife were indulged to get earning from trust property and there are sufficient evidence, however, he has not disputed that in a civil suit the complainant appeared as the witness and the present applicant has no criminal antecedent. He submits that if the applicant is enlarged on bail there are all possibilities that he will make an attempt to get benefit from the earning of the trust property, therefore, some stringent condition may be imposed upon the applicant if he enlarged on bail.
8. After hearing the rival submission of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 06.05.2026, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant Ankush Sharma 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 following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall join trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking unnecessary adjournment.
(b) The applicant shall surrender his passport (if any) to the Trial Court within three days after being released on bail.
(c) The applicant shall not make any attempt to make from the trust property and will also not indulge in any such activity and can live with his grand-mother in the property of the trust in a very peaceful manner. The applicant will also not interfere in any manner with the functioning of day to day affairs of the trust.
11. In case of breach of any such conditions, the prosecution or the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28-07-2026 Parul