Prasanjeet Singh Sandhu Alias Sunny vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2399 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Prasanjeet Singh Sandhu Alias Sunny vs State Of Uttarakhand on 25 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                   Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2026
                                   In
                    Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2026
Prasanjeet Singh Sandhu alias Sunny                   ........... Appellant
                                   Vs.
State of Uttarakhand                                ........... Respondent
Present : Mr. Vikas Anand and Ms. Gyanmati Kushwaha, Advocates for the
          appellant.
          Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
          Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate for the informant.


Coram :     Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani. J.
            Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and

order dated 17.12.2025/22.12.2025, passed in Sessions Trial

No.164 of 2018, State vs. Angrej Singh alias Rinku and others, by

the court of Third Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, District

Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant has been convicted under

Sections 302 r/w 34, 120B, 307 r/w 34 IPC and sentenced

accordingly. The appellant seeks bail during pendency of the

appeal.

2. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2026.

3. According to the FIR, on 23.04.2018, named persons had

abused and threatened the brother of the informant PW1 Mohd.

Khalid, asking him to leave the Transport Nagar area.

Subsequently, on 03.05.2018 at 10:20 a.m. when PW1 Mohd.

Khalid was with his brother and others at Kiccha bye pass, two

motorcycle borne assailants, who had masked their faces opened

fire, due to which, the deceased Sameer Ahmed was hit by 3-4

bullets and subsequently, he died.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the co-

accused Jasvinder Singh had already been granted bail; the role of

the appellant is far better than the co-convict Jasvinder Singh in so

far as the bail is concerned. It is argued that as per prosecution,

the daughter of the co-convict Jasvinder Singh had transferred

some money in account of the appellant, who hired the shooters,

but it is argued that there is no evidence to suggest that in any

manner, the appellant Prasanjeet Singh Sandhu alias Sunny was

connected with any shooters.

5. Learned State Counsel submits that the money was

transferred by the daughter of Jasvinder Singh in the account of

the appellant, who hired the shooters.

6. The Court wanted to know, as to what is the evidence,

which suggests that the appellant is connected with the alleged

shooters? Learned State Counsel submits that there is evidence to

it.

7. Having considered this and other attending factors of this

case, we are of the view that it is a case in which the execution of

sentence should be suspended and the appellant be enlarged on

bail.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. The execution of sentence, which is under challenge in

this appeal shall remain suspended during the pendency of the

appeal.