Gurmeet Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4724 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Gurmeet Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 8 October, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

         IA No.1140 of 2025 for Second Bail Application
                               In
               Criminal Appeal No. 331 of 2018

Gurmeet Singh                                               ...... Appellant

                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                                      ..... Respondent
                                    And

               Criminal Appeal No. 332 of 2018

Gurmeet Singh                                               ...... Appellant

                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                                      ..... Respondent


Present:
Ms. Pushpa Joshi, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Chetna Latwal, Advocate for
the appellant, through video conferencing.
Mr. B.N. Maulkhi, D.A.G. for the State of Uttarakhand.

Coram:        Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The Criminal Appeal no.331 of 2018 has been

preferred against judgment and order dated 18.09.2018, passed in

Sessions Trial No.351A of 2013, State Vs. Gurmeet Singh, by the

court of Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant

has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 302 read with

Section 34 IPC and Section 506 IPC. The Criminal Appeal no.332

of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated

18.09.2018, passed in Sessions Trial No.353 of 2013, State Vs.

Gurmeet Singh, by the court of Sessions Judge, Udham Singh

Nagar. By it, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced

under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959.

2. Heard.

3. These are admitted appeals.

4. List on 30.12.2025 for final hearing.

5. Heard on Second Bail Applications (IA) No.1140 of

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant is in custody for more than 9 years 11 months now; he

is 72 years of age; there are less chances of appeal being heard in

near future.

7. Learned State Counsel admits that the appellant is

72 years of age and he is in custody for more than 9 years 11

months.

8. It is another admitted fact that today, co-convict

Lakhvinder @ Lakhi, has been granted bail on the same case,

based on the period of incarceration, which is slightly more than

the period of custody, which the appellant has already undergone.

9. Having considered the period of incarceration; the

age of the appellant; 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 appellant be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. The sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeals.

12. The appellant be released on bail during the

pendency of the appeal on his executing a personal bond and

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

satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Alok Mahra, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 08.10.2025

Ravi Bisht