[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Buhsran Rana vs State Of Uttarakhand on 25 March, 2026
COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
2026:UHC:2153
BA1 No. 251 of 2026
Buhsran Rana --Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand --Respondent
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the Applicant.
2. Mr. N.S. Kaniyal, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant-
Bushran Rana, aged about 32 years, S/o Late Yakub, R/o Shiv Puri Nai
Basti, Khatauli, P.S. Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar. The Applicant
is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No. 15 of 2026,
registered at Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun, for
offences punishable under Sections 310, 331(4), 3(5), and 317(3) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3 read with Section 25
and Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act.
4. Heard Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the Applicant, and
Mr. N.S. Kaniyal, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.
Perused the record.
5. The present case relates to an incident of house trespass during
late hours of the night at about 9:50 PM by four miscreants, wherein it
is alleged that cash amounting to ₹1,00,000/- and jewellery were
stolen. Subsequently, the case was converted into one of loot, and the
present Applicant has been implicated as the person who allegedly
hatched the entire plan.
6. It is submitted on behalf of the Applicant that he has been
falsely implicated and is alleged to be the mastermind of the crime,
despite the fact that he has neither been named in the FIR nor
identified by the complainant's wife, whereas the other four accused
persons have been identified. It is further submitted that no Test
Identification Parade has been conducted. Hence, it is prayed that the
Applicant be enlarged on bail.
7. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and
contended that the incident is a well-planned case of dacoity, wherein
the present Applicant is the mastermind. It is submitted that the
Applicant resides nearby and had conducted reconnaissance (recce) of
the house and engaged the other accused persons in committing the
offence. It is further submitted that part of the stolen property, namely
a ring and cash amounting to ₹16,200/-, has been recovered, while the
remaining amount has been recovered from the co-accused. Therefore,
it is urged that the Applicant should not be granted bail.
8. Considering the submissions advanced and the material
available on record, this Court notes that, prima facie, the offence of
dacoity requires the involvement of five or more persons, which aspect
requires deeper examination during trial. At this stage, it cannot
conclusively be held that the Applicant is the mastermind of the
alleged offence or that he conducted any reconnaissance. Further, the
Applicant was not named in the FIR and has not been identified by the
complainant's wife, who is stated to be an eyewitness, and no Test
Identification Parade has been conducted. Thus, without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the
Applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the Bail
Application is allowed.
9. Let the Applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal
bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court concerned.
10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
25.03.2026
Shiksha
