Uttarakhand High Court
C528/971/2026 of VIPIN NAYYAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 2 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 C528/971/2026 Vipin Nayyar --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Mr. Vipin Nayyar, applicant
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.
UKHC010077992026
2026:UHC:5311 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
C528/971/2026
Vipin Nayyar
--Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Mr. Vipin Nayyar, applicant in person.
2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State.
3. Instant application has been preferred by the applicant filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved with the serious remark made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal while rejecting his bail application vide order dated 12.12.2025 in First Bail Application No.137 of 2025, which is reflected from para 7 of the order.
4. It is argued by the applicant in person that the serious remark made by the Additional Sessions Judge while rejecting his bail application will prejudice his right of defence in the ongoing trial of Special Sessions Trial No.15 of 2025 arising out of FIR No.41 of 2025 registered at Police Station Muni- Ki-Reti, District Tehri Garhwal.
5. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA submits that the remark as made by learned trial court while rejecting the bail application have no any impact on the ongoing trial, however the applicant submits that it will seriously prejudice his right to defend himself in the trial.
6. I found force on such submissions of the applicant and in such view of the matter any adverse remark, as made by UKHC010077992026
2026:UHC:5311 the learned Additional Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail application of the present applicant, will not prejudice the right of the applicant to take any defence plea in the trial court and the trial court will proceed with the trial without being influenced with the adverse remark as made by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in its order dated 12.12.2025.
7. Subject to the above direction, the instant C528 application is disposed of finally.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 02.07.2026 Arti