[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Sahil vs State Of Uttarakhand on 16 February, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:933
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
16TH FEBRUARY, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.218 of 2026
Sahil .....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .....Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Ankush Singhal, Advocate
holding brief of Mr. Harshpal
Sekhon, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh,
Deputy Advocate General.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Applicant - Sahil is in judicial custody for the
offence under Section 109(1), Section 3(5), Section
61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Section 3 read with Section 25 (1B)(a) of the Arms Act,
1959 in Case Crime No.134 of 2025, registered at
Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar.
2. According to the respondent, on 28.04.2025,
at 22:49 hrs, the police received an information that
five persons on two motorcycles are coming, who had
committed robbery on 25.04.2025 and 26.04.2025.
The police directed the persons, who were coming on
motorcycles, to surrender. Then, they fired at the
police. Applicant was apprehended. The police
recovered Rs.3,500/- from the possession of the
2026:UHC:933
applicant. He told them that the said money was
looted by him with his other associates on 25.04.2025
and 26.04.2025. He was arrested at 03:05 hrs on
29.04.2025.
3. On 25.04.2025, at around 10.15 p.m.,
unknown persons arrived at the informant's petrol
pump "Guru Nanak Filling Station" on two motorcycles
and four of them looted Rs.27,000/- by showing
country made pistols to Nitin Singh, the salesman of
the informant. The First Information Report (FIR
No.133 of 2025) was registered on 26.04.2025. The
applicant and others committed another dacoity on
26.04.2025 and looted Rs.40,000/- and a mobile phone
from a petrol pump "MA Fuels" (FIR No.131 of 2025).
4. Heard Mr. Ankush Singhal, learned counsel
appearing for the applicant and Mrs. Manisha Rana
Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent.
5. Mr. Ankush Singhal, Advocate, appearing for
the applicant, has contended that the applicant has
been falsely implicated by the police. He is not named
in the said First Information Reports (FIR No.131 of
2025 and FIR No.133 of 2025). He was not identified
by the alleged victim in the Test Identification Parade.
2026:UHC:933
He was not involved in the said offence. Nothing was
recovered from his possession. He has not been
convicted by any Court. He is a permanent resident of
District Sonipat (Haryana), therefore, there is no
possibility of his absconding, and, he is in custody since
29.04.2025. Harendra alias Bittu, the co-accused of
similar role, has already been granted regular bail by
this Court on 05.01.2026.
6. Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate
General has opposed the bail application.
7. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an
exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the
personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of
keeping the accused in detention during the
investigation or trial is not punishment. The main
purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the
accused.
8. Having considered the submissions of learned
counsel for both the parties and in the facts and
circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep
the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period,
therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the
2026:UHC:933
merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the
applicant deserves bail at this stage.
9. The Bail Application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant - Sahil be released on bail
on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two
reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the court concerned.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 16.02.2026
Shiv/
