[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2482/2025 on 16 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1772
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1/2482/2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel
for the applicant.
2. Mr. Pradeep Lohan, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
3. Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, learned
counsel for the complainant.
4. Applicant-Nazish, who is in judicial
custody in connection with Case
Crime/F.I.R. No. 327 of 2025, registered
under Section 109, 351(3) & 61 of the
B.N.S., at Police Station Ramnagar,
District Nainital, has sought his release on
bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties
and perused the material available on
record.
6. As per the prosecution case, the
complainant lodged the F.I.R. alleging that
the co-accused Zaid and another person
were moving around on a tractor while
playing a DJ on it. The father of the
complainant restrained them from taking
the tractor in front of his house as
preparations for a festival were going on
there. Upon this, the accused persons
entered into an altercation with the father
of the complainant. In the meantime, the
applicant Najish allegedly reached the spot
and instigated the co-accused Zaid to
assault the father of the complainant with
the intention to kill him, as a result of
which he sustained internal injuries and
was admitted to the hospital. After
completion of the investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted the charge-
2026:UHC:1772
sheet against the present applicant.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant
would submit that the applicant is
innocent and has falsely been implicated
in the present case due to ulterior motives.
It is further submitted that although the
F.I.R. has been registered under Section
109 of the B.N.S., a bare perusal of the
medical report would reveal that the
injuries sustained by the injured are
simple in nature and fall within the
category of bailable offences. It is also
contended that the essential ingredients of
Section 351(3) of the B.N.S. are not
attracted in the present case, inasmuch as
the F.I.R. does not disclose the requisite
intention, knowledge or any specific overt
act on the part of the applicant so as to
constitute an offence of attempt to cause
death or grievous hurt.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has
further drawn the attention of this Court
to the injury report as well as the
supplementary medical report of the
injured. In the said reports, the Medical
Officer has opined that there is no
significant abnormality in the neuro-
parenchyma and that all the injuries
sustained by the injured are simple in
nature. It is also submitted that the
injuries described in the medical report
are lacerated wounds and there is no
injury caused by any sharp-edged weapon,
as alleged in the F.I.R. Thus, according to
the learned counsel, the allegations made
in the F.I.R. are not supported by the
medical evidence.
9. Learned counsel for the applicant
would further submit that the applicant
has no criminal history; that, the applicant
is in judicial custody since 03.12.2025 and
his bail application has already been
rejected by the court below vide order
2026:UHC:1772
dated 18.12.2025. The applicant is
permanent residents of District Nainital
and there is no likelihood of his
absconding or misusing the liberty of bail.
It is also submitted that the trial is likely
to take a considerable period of time for its
conclusion.
10. Per contra, learned counsel for the
State as well as learned counsel appearing
for the complainant have vehemently
opposed the bail application. However,
they do not dispute the fact that the
applicant is in judicial custody since
03.12.2025 and that his bail application
has already been rejected by the court
below vide order dated 18.12.2025.
11. Having heard learned counsel for the
parties and upon perusal of the material
available on record, and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, this Court finds that the nature
of injuries, as reflected in the medical
report, are simple in nature. Considering
the period of incarceration of the
applicant, the absence of any criminal
antecedents, and the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of
the view that the applicant have made out
a fit case for grant of bail at this stage.
12. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed.
13. Let the applicant be released on bail
in the aforesaid case crime number on his
executing a personal bond and furnishing
two reliable sureties each of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
16.03.2026
Mamta
2026:UHC:1772
