Uttarakhand High Court
BA4/16/2025 of IRSHAD Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 30 October 2025
UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Fourth Bail Application No.16 of 2025 Irshad ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr.
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.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Fourth Bail Application No.16 of 2025
Irshad
….....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent
Present:- Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Pavan Kumar Nath, Advocate for the informant.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 422 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 504, 506, 120B IPC, Police Station Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. This is fourth bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed in non prosecution on 01.04.2023. His second bail application was rejected on merits on 15.03.2024. His third bail application was treated as short term bail on 13.11.2024.
4. It is argued that after the third bail application of the applicant was treated as short term bail application, the co-accused Javed has already been granted bail and the grounds are not dissimilar, because the applicant is in custody for a long, similar to the co-accused Javed.
5. This fact is admitted by learned State counsel.
6. Having considered, the period of incarceration and other attending factors, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
2
7. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not approach the injured, the family members of the deceased either personally or through any of his relatives or through any other mode.
(ii) The applicant shall not make any post on social media platform or electronically at any other place with regard to the incident or this case. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 30.10.2025 Jitendra