Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/11/2017 on 13 February, 2026
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
CRLA 11/2017
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Arjun Singh, Advocate, i/b Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy AG, with Mr. R.K. Joshi, Brief Holder, for the State. (2) Vide judgment and order dated 17.12.2016, passed by Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in Sessions Trial No. 04 of 2016, appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376-D, 506 and 342 IPC. Maximum sentence imposed on the appellant is to undergo RI for 20 years and to pay fine of ₹40,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376-D IPC. First bail application was rejected by coordinate Bench on 6.7.2020, on merit. Second bail was rejected by this Court on 16.6.2023. Now, third bail application (IA/2183/2024) has been moved on behalf of appellant- convict.
(3) The new ground for bail is that the appellant suffered incarceration for a significant period of time inasmuch he has undergone imprisonment of more than 50 per cent of the sentence imposed on him. It is further submitted that there is no allegation of any misconduct inside jail during the period of incarceration. Learned Counsel further contended that appellant does not have any criminal history and the appeal is not likely to be heard finally in the near future and in view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh v. State of UP (Criminal Appeal No. 308 of 2022), appellant is entitled for consideration of bail pending appeal as he has undergone more than 50 per cent of the sentence (considering remission).
(4) Learned State Counsel was asked to get custody certificate. Today, he has produced in the Court a letter dated 13.2.2026, issued by Senior Superintendent, Grade-1, District Jail, Haridwar. Perusal of the said letter reveals that appellant has undergone actual sentence of 9 years, 10 months and 10 days, while with remission, the sentence undergone by him is 12 years, 1 month and 4 days.
(5) Considering that the appellant has undergone almost 50 per cent of the sentence and the fact that appeal is not likely to be heard finally in near future, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal.
(6) Accordingly, third bail application is allowed. Let the appellant be released on bail in the present case on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. The appellant shall furnish his mobile number and correct address to the SHO, PS Nachani, Pithoragarh and shall keep the same updated. The appellant shall mark his presence in the said police station once in every month.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 13.2.2026 Pr