Safi Ahmed And Another ...... ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 5491 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Safi Ahmed And Another ...... ... vs State Of Uttarakhand on 13 November, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                IA No.1 of 2024 For Bail Application
                                 In
               Criminal Appeal No. 659 of 2025

Safi Ahmed and Another                                    ...... Appellants

                                      Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                                  ..... Respondent

Present:
Mr. V.K. Guglani, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Pankaj Joshi, A.G.A. for the State.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The instant appeal has been preferred against

judgment and order dated 18.10.2025, passed in Sessions Trial

No. 240 of 2022, State v. Shahrukh @ Salman and Others, by the

court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, District Udham

Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant-Safi Ahmed has been convicted

and sentenced under Sections 363, 120-B, 506 IPC and Section

25(1-B)(A) of the Arms Act, 1959, and appellant Smt. Chhoti has

been convicted and sentenced under Sections 363 read with

Section 120-B IPC and Section 506 IPC.

2. Heard.

3. Admit.

4. Let call for the LCR.

5. Once LCR is received, paper books be prepared

and provided to learned counsel for the parties, as per rules.

6. List in due course for final hearing.

7. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.2 of 2025

8. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

the appellants have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for

a period of 4 years; they have already undergone more than half of

the period of sentence imposed on them; there are less chances of

appeal being heard in near future.

9. The fact with regard to the period of custody,

which the appellants have already undergone, has not been

disputed by learned State Counsel.

10. Having considered the period of incarceration and

other attending factors, 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.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. The sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeal.

13. The appellants be released on bail during the

pendency of the appeal on their executing a personal bond and

furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each

one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 13.11.2025

Ravi Bisht