[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1552/2025 on 12 February, 2026
2026:UHC:826
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1 No.1552 of 2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Rishab Ranghar, Advocate for
the applicant.
Mr. Akshay Latwal, A.G.A. and Mr.
Prabhat Kandpal, Brief Holder for the
State of Uttarakhand.
2. This first bail application has been
moved by the applicant seeking regular
bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0358 of
2025, under Section 103(1) and 3(5) of
B.N.S., registered at Police Station Patel
Nagar, District Dehradun.
3. An F.I.R. was lodged by the
complainant alleging that a dispute
existed regarding the common pathway
between the deceased (father of the
complainant) and his brother. It is stated
that on 13.07.2025, a sudden quarrel
ensued between the deceased and the
applicant along with the applicant's son,
Sagar. During the altercation, it is
alleged that the applicant and his son
struck the deceased on the chest,
pushed him, causing him to fall to the
ground. The complainant further alleges
that he then took the deceased to the
Cantonment Hospital, Prem Nagar, from
where he was referred to Subharti
Hospital, and upon arrival, the deceased
was declared dead.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present matter
and has been in judicial custody since
15.07.2025. It is contended that the
2026:UHC:826
complaint was lodged based on hearsay,
as the complainant was not present at
the scene of the alleged incident, which
is apparent from the perusal of the F.I.R.
Learned counsel further submits that
even if the allegations in the F.I.R. are
taken at their face value, the provisions
contained under Sections 103(1) and
3(5) of the B.N.S. are not attracted and,
at the most, the case would fall under
Exception 4 to Section 101 of B.N.S. It is
also submitted that, if granted bail, the
applicant will not misuse the liberty and
is willing to furnish bail surety to the
satisfaction of this Court.
5. Learned State Counsel, however,
vehemently opposes the prayer for bail,
submitting that a dispute exists
regarding the common pathway and that
the applicant had, with premeditation,
caused the death of the deceased.
6. Considering the submission of
learned counsel for the parties and
without expressing any opinion as to the
final merits of the case, this Court is of
the view that applicant deserves bail at
this stage.
7. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant, namely, Raju be
released on bail, on executing personal
bond and furnishing two reliable sureties,
each of like amount, to the satisfaction of
Court concerned.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
12.02.2026
Arpan
ARPAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853654
45e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e,
JAISWAL
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454
C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66,
cn=ARPAN JAISWAL
Date: 2026.02.12 15:34:20 +05'30'
