Lakhan Singh Bisht ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 5140 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Lakhan Singh Bisht ... vs State Of Uttarakhand on 30 October, 2025

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

      HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G.NARENDAR
                                 AND
        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
                       30th October, 2025
      IA No. 2 of 2023 (Bail and Suspension of Sentence)
                                  In
               Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2023


Lakhan Singh Bisht                     -----------Appellant (in Jail)

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand                         ----------Respondents

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. M.S.Pal, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. B.M.Pingal,
learned counsel for the appellant/applicant.
Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh
Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER:

(per Mr. SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)

Appellant has been convicted under Sections

302, 324 and 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-

for offence under Section 302 IPC; rigorous

imprisonment of 2 years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the

offence under Section 324 IPC; and rigorous

imprisonment of 1 year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- for

offence under Section 147 IPC.

2. IA No.2 of 2023 has been filed by the

appellant Lakhan Singh for grant of bail and suspension

of conviction and sentence. This application has been

filed by the appellant with the prayer to suspend the

execution of sentence and release the

applicant/appellant on bail in Sessions Trial No.05 of

2019, State vs. Lakhan Singh and others.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant contends

that as per the prosecution case, Lakhan Singh and six

other persons had beaten Puran Chandra, Jeevan

Chandra (PW2) and Dinesh Chandra (PW3) with lathi

and danda. PW2 and PW3 got injured and Puran

Chandra died due to injuries. The recovery of alleged

weapon Danda was made on the pointing out of PW2

and PW3 almost about 17 days from the date of

incident. No specific role was assigned to any of the

accused and injury report did not corroborate the

version of the prosecution.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant further

submits that the co-accused namely, Nandan Singh,

Himanshu Bisht, Kailash Singh and Yashwant Singh

have been enlarged on bail vide order dated

30.08.2025 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. The

appellant/applicant was on bail during pendency of the

trial and there is no complaint against the

appellant/applicant regarding misuse of the liberty

when he was on bail; the appellant was taken into

custody after pronouncement of the judgment and is

languishing in jail since 27.07.2023; the appellant has

no previous criminal history and there is no chance of

misuse of liberty of bail or absconding of the appellant.

5. Learned Deputy Advocate General opposes

the bail and submits that the appellant was named in

the FIR whereas co-accused were not named in the FIR

but he fairly concedes that the appellant and the co-

accused were assigned the similar role and the

appellant was on bail during trial and co-accused

persons have been enlarged on bail vide order dated

30.08.2025.

6. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we

are of the view that the appellant and other co-accused

were assigned the similar role and the co-accused have

been enlarged on bail, as such, the appellant/applicant

also deserves bail during the pendency of the Appeal.

7. In view of the above, we are of the

considered view that the appellant has made out a case

for bail. Accordingly, the Bail Application of appellant

Lakhan Singh (IA No. 02 of 2023) is allowed. The

sentence imposed under the judgment and order dated

28.07.2023 in Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2019, by the

Court of 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Nainital, District Nainital is hereby stands suspended.

The appellant/applicant is directed to be set at liberty

forthwith, if not required in any other case, subject to

appellant executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/-

and furnishing one surety for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate.

8. List this Appeal in due course along with

connected appeals.

(G. NARENDAR, C.J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 30.10.2025 Kaushal