[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Ramkumar & 03 Others ...... Applicants vs State Of Uttarakhand on 29 January, 2026
2026:UHC:658
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Anticipatory Bail Application No.43 of 2026
Ramkumar & 03 Others ...... Applicants
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ..... Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present:
Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel (through V.C.) for the applicants
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy A.G. with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned
Brief Holder for the State
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: 29.01.2026
Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
This is anticipatory bail application moved by
the applicants Ramkumar, Gurpreet, Sandeep and
Aashish in FIR No.0016 of 2026 relating to offences
punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 74 of
B.N.S., Police Station Khanpur, District Haridwar.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits
that the alleged incident is said to have been committed
on 11.01.2026 whereas the impugned FIR has been
lodged after a delay of 06 days for which no satisfactory
explanation has been furnished by the complainant. He
further submits that the impugned FIR is nothing but a
counter blast to the FIR lodged by applicant no.1 against
the complainant on 12.01.2026. It is also submitted that
the FIR has been lodged with ulterior motive of falsely
implicating the applicants and that there is no element of
criminality.
3. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposes
the application but he does not dispute the fact that
there are cross-cases registered against both the
parties, arising out of the same incident, and that the
applicant no.1 had already lodged an FIR prior to lodging
of the impugned FIR in respect of the same incident.
4. Considering the entire conspectus of things
and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, this Court is of the view that the applicants have
made out a case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly,
anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed
that, in the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be
enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with two sureties, each in the like
amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the
Investigating Officer ("IO"). In addition to it, the
applicants shall also comply with the following
conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall co-operate in the
investigation.
(ii) The applicants shall not approach any
witness/victim in any manner, whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country
without prior permission of the concerned
court.
(iv) The applicants shall deposit their passport with
the Investigating Officer ("IO"). The passport
may only be returned by the order of the court
concerned. In case the applicants do not have
passport, they shall give an undertaking to
that effect to the IO.
(v) The applicants shall also give an undertaking
on above-stated condition no.(i), (ii) & (iii).
(vi) It is made clear that, in case, applicants
misuse or violate any of the conditions
imposed upon them, the prosecuting agency
will be free to move the Court for cancellation
of the Anticipatory Bail.
(Subhash Upadhyay, J.)
Vacation Judge
29.01.2026
Rajni
RAJINI
2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448ac
3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342,
GUSAIN
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF4
FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158A0
A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN
Date: 2026.01.29 15:41:16 +05'30'
