[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:934
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
16TH FEBRUARY, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.219 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 310(2), Section 311, Section
3(5), Section 61(2), Section 317(3) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 read with Section
25 of the Arms Act, 1959 in Case Crime No.133 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
2026:UHC:934
recovered Rs.3,500/- from the possession of the
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
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 Report (FIR No.133 of
2025). He was not identified by the alleged victim in
the Test Identification Parade. He was not involved in
2026:UHC:934
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:934
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/
