Gurmej Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Two Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 1120 UK

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1120 UK
Judgement Date : 17 February, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Gurmej Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Two Others on 17 February, 2026

Author: Alok Kumar Verma

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
                       17TH FEBRUARY, 2026
     SECOND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 6 of 2026



Gurmej Singh                                         ..... Applicant
                                Versus
State of Uttarakhand and two Others                  ....Respondents

Counsel for the Applicant   :     Mr. Vikas Anand,
                                  Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent :       Mr. Pratiroop Pandey,
Nos.1 & 2                          Assistant Government Advocate.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail

in Case Crime No.102 of 2025, registered at Police Station

Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar under Section 69 of the

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. On 16.12.2025, the First Anticipatory Bail

Application No.502 of 2025 was dismissed for want of

prosecution.

3. Supplementary affidavit of the applicant dated

15.02.2026 is taken on record.

4. Heard Mr. Vikas Anand, learned counsel for the

applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant

Government Advocate for the respondent nos.1 & 2.

5. Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate submitted that the

First Anticipatory Bail Application was listed on 16.12.2025.

On the said date, the counsel for the applicant failed to mark

his appearance before the Court. Applicant is in Armed

Forces and he should not suffer for the mistake committed

by the counsel.

6. As per the First Information Report dated

14.04.2025, the applicant, under the pretext of marriage,

established physical relations with the informant on

13.12.2024 and even after that he established physical

relations with her several times.

7. Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate has contended that the

applicant has been falsely implicated by the informant.. The

informant, aged about 32 years and the applicant, aged

about 31 years, were only friends. He has not made any

physical relation with the informant.

8. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government

Advocate, has sought three weeks' time to file objection to

the second anticipatory bail application.

9. Time is granted.

10. Notice is being issued to the respondent no.3.

Steps to be taken within 3 days.

11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and in the facts and circumstances of the case, as an ad-

interim measure, it is directed that in the event of arrest of

the applicant Gurmej Singh, he shall be released on interim

bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.30,000/- and two

reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction

of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer, subject to the

following conditions:-

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;