High CourtsSingle Bench

Harjinder Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 22 December 2025 · Citation: (2025) 12 UK CK 0022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 109(1), 117(2), 352 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 566 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 470 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.97 of 2025, registered at Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2.

The First Information Report was registered under Sections 109(1), 117(2) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Charge-sheet has been filed under Section 117(2) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

According to the First Information Report dated 15.05.2025, the applicant and other three co-accused beat the informant’s brother at around 07:30 a.m. on 15.05.2025 due to which he sustained injuries.

4.

Heard Ms. Sarita Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

5.

Ms. Sarita Bisht, Advocate appearing for the applicant, has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The offence under Section 117(2) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are triable by Magistrate. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. Baljeet Singh alias Sethi and Aaryan Singh have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant was granted interim bail on 06.06.2025, and, the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

6.

Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder, has opposed the anticipatory bail application.

7.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

8.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 06.06.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Harjinder Singh, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

9.

It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.