Uttarakhand High Court
Pooja Alias Osin vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 September, 2025
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
20TH SEPTEMBER, 2025
BAIL APPLICATION (IA No.01 of 2023)
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.127 of 2023
Pooja alias Osin ....Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ....Respondent
Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Harshpal Sekhon,
Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. G.S. Sandhu,
Additional Advocate
General assisted by
Mr. Sandeep Sharma,
Assistant Government
Advocate.
With
SECOND BAIL APPLICATION
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.168 of 2023
Mukesh Singh Bankoti ....Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ....Respondent
Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Suresh Chandra Bhatt,
Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. G.S. Sandhu,
Additional Advocate
General assisted by
Mr. Sandeep Sharma,
Assistant Government
Advocate.
2
(Per : Shri Alok Kumar Verma, J.)
The First Bail Application (No.01 of 2023) of
the appellant-Mukesh Singh Bankoti was dismissed as
withdrawn granting liberty to him to file afresh with
correct particulars.
2. Appellants have been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, "IPC") and
have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with
a fine of Rs.5,000/- each; they have been convicted and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of ten years each with a fine of Rs.2,000/-each
for the offence punishable under Section 394 read with
Section 34 IPC; they have been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 411 read with Section
34 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of
Rs.500/- each, they have been further convicted and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of five years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for
the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC vide
judgment dated 04.02.2023/06.02.2023, passed by
learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh
Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 200 of 2013. All the
sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
3
3. The record of Criminal Appeal No.127 of
2023 will be treated as a leading case.
4. According to the prosecution, Arif (deceased),
the brother of the informant, used to drive his taxi
(Indigo UK04P2998). Two men and a woman booked
his taxi on 03.03.2013. The dead body of the deceased
Arif was found in Nanak Lake on 04.03.2013. Pooja,
Mukesh Singh Bankoti (appellants) and Aakash Rana
were arrested when they were going in an Indica car,
Registration No.UK04F2998.
5. Heard Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel
for appellant in CRLA No.127 of 2023, Mr. Suresh
Chandra Bhatt, learned counsel for appellant in CRLA
No.168 of 2023 and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional
Advocate General for the respondent.
6. Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant-Pooja alias Osin and Mr.
Suresh Chandra Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant-Mukesh Singh Bankoti contended that the
conviction of the appellant is based on the retracted
confession made under Section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. The recovery of vehicle is
doubtful as there was no independent witness. They
further contended that the present case rests on
circumstantial evidence. It is a well established law that
in cases of the circumstantial evidence, the chain of
4
evidence should be complete as not to leave
any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent
with the innocence of the accused and must show that
in all human probability the act must have been done
by the accused. Even grave suspicion cannot take place
of proof. Appellants were on bail during the trial and the
conditions of bail were never misused or violated by
them. Appellants are permanent residents of District
Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no possibility of
their absconding.
7. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate
General, has opposed the Bail Applications. However, he
has conceded that the appellants were on bail during
the trial and the conditions of bail were never misused
by them.
8. Having considered the submissions of learned
counsel for both the parties, without expressing any
opinion as to the merits or demerits of the case, we are
of the view that the appellants deserve bail during the
pendency of these appeals.
9. The Bail Applications are allowed.
10. Let the appellants - Pooja alias Osin and
Mukesh Singh Bankoti be released on bail on their
executing personal bonds and furnishing two reliable
sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them,
to the satisfaction of the trial court.
5
11. Let a copy of this order be placed on the
record of the connected Criminal Appeal No.168 of
2023.
__________________
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
____________
Alok Mahra, J.
Date:20.09.2025
Neha
