High CourtsSingle Bench

Kuldeep Haldwar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 20 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 UK CK 0522

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Mahra, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 61, 109(1), 118(1), 351(3) · Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 4, 25
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No.1923 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

8 paragraphs · 288 words

Alok Mahra, J

1.

Applicant Kuldeep Haldwar, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 75 of 2025, under Sections 118(1), 109(1), 351(3), 61, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 4/25 of Arms Act, registered at P.S. Jhankaiya, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

3.

As per the prosecution, the FIR was lodged alleging that Shaurya, a resident of Mayur Vihar, Amaun (Khatima), had been in telephonic contact with the informant friend’s minor daughter. After the informant spoke to Shaurya’s parents regarding the matter and was returning, Shaurya along with his friends allegedly attacked him with a knife; that the informant sustained injuries on his stomach and right thumb while attempting to defend himself. It is further alleged that Shaurya and his friends assaulted him with kicks and punches, and Shaurya also threatened to kill him before leaving the spot. Shaurya’s parents subsequently arrived and intervened.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case; that, the applicant is not named in the FIR and that the main accused, Shaurya, has already been granted bail.

5.

Learned State Counsel does not dispute this fact.

6.

In view of the above, but, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case for bail.

7.

The bail application is thus, allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.