Uttarakhand High Court
Anmol vs State Of Uttarakhand on 1 April, 2026
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2025)
In
Criminal Jail Appeal No.92 of 2023
Anmol ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Priyanshu Gairola, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.256 of 2023
Mohd. Rafi ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Karan Anand and Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocates for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.264 of 2023
Sukha ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Ankush Singhal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Harshpal
Sekhon, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
2
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.281 of 2023
Bhura ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.299 of 2023
Asif ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Ms. Khushboo Tiwari Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
Coram:Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) These appeals arise from one common judgment and order dated 31.03.2023, passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and others, hence they are heard together.
2. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 92 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant Anmol against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and 3 others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Anmol has been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced accordingly.
3. Criminal Appeal No. 256 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant Mohd. Rafi against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Mohd. Rafi has been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced accordingly.
4. Criminal Appeal No. 264 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant Sukha against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Sukha has been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced accordingly.
5. Criminal Appeal No. 281 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant Bhura against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Bhura has been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read 4 with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced accordingly.
6. Criminal Appeal No. 299 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant Asif against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Asif has been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced accordingly.
7. These are admitted appeal. The appellants seek bail during pendency of the appeals.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. According to the prosecution case, some miscreants tried to steal buffalos from Village Mahtosh, but the villagers raised an alarm due to which those miscreants ran away along with the vehicle, Police tried to stop the vehicle, but they did not stop even after signal having been given by the Police. Not only this, the miscreants attacked the police party with that vehicle due to which the riffle and motorcycle of the police personnel were damaged and one of the Constables Vasant died on the spot and another sustained injuries. An FIR was lodged at Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
10. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants did not commit any offence; that, they have falsely been 5 implicated; that, no Test Identification Parade was done during the investigation. In fact, the appellants were not identified by any witness during trial also.
11. Learned State counsel admits that Test Identification Parade was not done. He also admits that the appellants were not identified at the dock during trial.
12. The Court wanted to know from the State counsel as to how the vehicle was identified as the Registration number of the vehicle was not noted in the FIR. Learned State counsel submits that right side of the bumper of the vehicle had blood stains on it and that the vehicle which was recovered had recently been painted on its bumper.
13. Admittedly, the appellants were not identified during investigation or in the court.
14. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case in which the execution of sentence should be suspended and the appellants be enlarged on bail.
15. The bail applications are allowed.
16. The execution of sentence appealed against is suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
17. The appellants - Anmol, Sukha, Asif, Mohd. Rafi and Bhura be released on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, by each 6 one of them, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
18. List in due course alongwith connected matters. 1 (Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 01.04.2026 01.04.2026 Akash