Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1512/2025 of VIJAY PAL ALIAS SETHU Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 23 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 BA1/1512/2025 Vijay Pal Alias Sethu --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. S.K.
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1512/2025
Vijay Pal Alias Sethu
--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. S.K. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State.
3. Present applicant “Vijay Pal @ Sethu, son of Chandru”, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 23.10.2023 bearing FIR No. 222 of 2023 registered at Police Station – Khanpur, District – Haridwar wherein on completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed and the applicant is summoned to face the trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that charge sheet was filed in the month of January, 2024 and the applicant was arrested on 23.10.2023 and since then, he is languishing in jail. Deceased was wife of the applicant and the incident was happened on 23.10.2023, and she was admitted in Government Hospital, Haridwar from where she was referred to AIIMS Rishikesh where she died on 27.10.2023 during treatment. He submits that cause of death is due to thermal burn injuries. He further submits that during trial children of the applicant, who were eye witness were declared hostile and there are in total 18 prosecution witnesses, out of which, uptil date only, 6 prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon.
5. On the other side, learned State Counsel submits that there is dying declaration of the deceased, in which deceased made direct allegation against the applicant, however, he has not disputed that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.10.2023 and still 12 prosecution witnesses have to be examined, therefore, the trial would not be expedited soon.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.10.2023 and out of 18 prosecution witnesses, uptil date only, 6 prosecution witnesses have been examined, therefore, there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon though the children of the applicant were declared hostile, therefore, this Court is of the view that 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 “Vijay Pal @ Sethu, son of Chandru”, be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to this condition that after being released on bail, applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 23.07.2026 SKS