Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/785/2026 of ANJALI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 9 June 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 785 of 2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Reema Rana, learned counsel for the applicant through Legal Aid. 2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1 No. 785 of 2026
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 counsel for the applicant through Legal Aid.
2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Present applicant Smt. Anjali, W/o Purab Singh is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 20.12.2025, bearing Case Crime No. 01 of 2025 wherein the present applicant along with her husband have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 352, 117(3), 118(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS 2023 P.S. Ghansali District Tehri Garhwal.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and even otherwise charge sheet has already been filed on 09.03.2026 and the present applicant is in prison along with her 1.5 years old child since 25.12.2025. She submits that in fact there was some family dispute in between the applicant’s husband and the complainant (real brother) due to which the incident was happened and the complainant was assaulted by the applicant’s husband who sustain grievous injuries in his both hands. She argued that this is a case of sudden provocation and there was no such intention and amputation of both hands as a consequence of infection during treatment and the medical complications. She further submits that present applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail with her minor child and she deserves for privilege to be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State submits that after thorough investigation charge sheet has been filed however he has not disputed that the applicant is a lady and languishing in jail since 25.12.2025 with her minor child and furthermore, since now the charge sheet has been filed there is no need of further custodial interrogation of the applicant.
6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that husband of the applicant is also languishing in jail in the said offence and charge sheet has already been filed, 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 ‘Anjali’ be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 09.06.2026 Parul