Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4609 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 25 September, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     IA No. 2 of 2025 (Application for Bail and Suspension of Sentence)
                                   In
                     Criminal Appeal No. 539 of 2025

 Mangal Sen
                                                                ........Appellant
                                     Versus

 State of Uttarakhand
                                                              ..... Respondent

 Present:-

         Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate for the appellant.
         Mr. V.S. Rawat, AGA for the State.

                      IA No. 1 of 2025 (Bail Application)
                                   In
                     Criminal Appeal No. 247 of 2025

 Ajay Pal and others
                                                               ........Appellants
                                     Versus

 State of Uttarakhand
                                                               ..... Respondent

 Present:-

         Mr. Anoop Jaiswal, Advocate for        the   appellants,   through   video
         conferencing.
         Mr. V.S. Rawat, AGA for the State.

 Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Since both these appeals arise from a common judgment

and order, they are heard together.

2. The instant appeals are preferred by the appellants

challenging the judgment and order dated 14.02.2025 passed in

Special Sessions Trial No. 134 of 2019, State v. Ajay Pal and others, by

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

appellants have been convicted under Section 323 read with 34 IPC

and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months

and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each. The appellants seek bail during

pendency of the appeals.

3. CRLA No. 539 of 2025 is already admitted.

4. Admit CRLA No. 247 of 2025.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the bail

applications and perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that both

these appellants were on bail during trial; they were on interim bail.

7. These factual narrations are not disputed by the learned

State Counsel.

8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a

case in which the execution of the sentence should be suspended and

the appellants be enlarged on bail.

9. The bail applications are allowed.

10. The execution of sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeals.

11. Let the appellants Mangal Sen, Ajay Pal, Rajneesh Kumar

and Rajesh Pal be released on bail, during the pendency of the

appeals, 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.

12. List the criminal appeals for final hearing in due course.

(Ravindra Maithani, J) 25.09.2025 Avneet/