[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Anmol vs State Of Uttarakhand on 1 April, 2026
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2025)
In
Criminal Jail Appeal No.92 of 2023
Anmol ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Priyanshu Gairola, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.256 of 2023
Mohd. Rafi ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Karan Anand and Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocates for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.264 of 2023
Sukha ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Ankush Singhal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Harshpal
Sekhon, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
2
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.281 of 2023
Bhura ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
With
Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
In
Criminal Appeal No.299 of 2023
Asif ........Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
1. Ms. Khushboo Tiwari Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A for the State.
Coram:Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
These appeals arise from one common judgment and order
dated 31.03.2023, passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v.
Mohd. Rafi and others, hence they are heard together.
2. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 92 of 2023 has been filed by the
appellant Anmol against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023
passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and
others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Anmol has been
convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read
with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced
accordingly.
3. Criminal Appeal No. 256 of 2023 has been filed by the
appellant Mohd. Rafi against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023
passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and
others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Mohd. Rafi has
been convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34,
332 read with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and Section
25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced accordingly.
4. Criminal Appeal No. 264 of 2023 has been filed by the
appellant Sukha against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023
passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and
others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Sukha has been
convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read
with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced
accordingly.
5. Criminal Appeal No. 281 of 2023 has been filed by the
appellant Bhura against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023
passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and
others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Bhura has been
convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read
with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced
accordingly.
6. Criminal Appeal No. 299 of 2023 has been filed by the
appellant Asif against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023
passed in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 2016, State v. Mohd. Rafi and
others, by the court of 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant Asif has been
convicted under Sections 302 read with 34, 307 read with 34, 332 read
with 34, 353 read with 34, 427 read with 34 IPC and sentenced
accordingly.
7. These are admitted appeal. The appellants seek bail during
pendency of the appeals.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
9. According to the prosecution case, some miscreants tried
to steal buffalos from Village Mahtosh, but the villagers raised an
alarm due to which those miscreants ran away along with the vehicle,
Police tried to stop the vehicle, but they did not stop even after signal
having been given by the Police. Not only this, the miscreants attacked
the police party with that vehicle due to which the riffle and motorcycle
of the police personnel were damaged and one of the Constables
Vasant died on the spot and another sustained injuries. An FIR was
lodged at Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
10. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants did not commit any offence; that, they have falsely been
implicated; that, no Test Identification Parade was done during the
investigation. In fact, the appellants were not identified by any witness
during trial also.
11. Learned State counsel admits that Test Identification
Parade was not done. He also admits that the appellants were not
identified at the dock during trial.
12. The Court wanted to know from the State counsel as to
how the vehicle was identified as the Registration number of the
vehicle was not noted in the FIR. Learned State counsel submits that
right side of the bumper of the vehicle had blood stains on it and that
the vehicle which was recovered had recently been painted on its
bumper.
13. Admittedly, the appellants were not identified during
investigation or in the court.
14. Having considered, 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.
15. The bail applications are allowed.
16. The execution of sentence appealed against is suspended
during the pendency of the appeal.
17. The appellants - Anmol, Sukha, Asif, Mohd. Rafi and
Bhura be released on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on their
executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, by each
one of them, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned.
18. List in due course alongwith connected matters.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.)
01.04.2026 01.04.2026
Akash
