Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1212/2026 of VIKAS Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 14 July 2026
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010120462026 2026:UHC:5787 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010120462026 BA1/1212/2026 Vikas --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.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010120462026
2026:UHC:5787 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
UKHC010120462026 BA1/1212/2026
Vikas
--Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Ms. Neeti Rana, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned AGA for the State.
3. Present applicant-Vikas, S/o Shri Prabhas is praying for bail in reference to a First Information Report dated 20.08.2025 bearing FIR No.0321 of 2025 registered at P.S. Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar wherein the present applicant alongwith one Raju have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and also claims parity of other co-accused Raju, who, as per the prosecution, is the main assailant and has been enlarged on bail on 19.11.2025. She further submits that only the role of catching hold has been assigned to the present applicant by the prosecution. She submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 10.11.2025. She further submits that now since the charge sheet has been filed as such there is no need of further custodial interrogation.
5. On the other hand Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned AGA has not disputed that the main assailant Raju has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 19.11.2025 and fairly submits that since the only role of catching hold has been assigned to the present applicant, therefore, he is in a better footing and the benefit of parity can also be given to the present applicant.
6. After hearing the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the main accused Raju, who, as per the prosecution, is the main assailant, has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 19.11.2025 and only the role of catching hold is assigned to the present applicant, 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-Vikas 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.) 14.07.2026 Arti