High CourtsSingle Bench

Rashid Pehalwan Alias Rashid vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 21 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 UK CK 0083

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 147, 148, 153A, 295, 307, 323, 324, 427 · Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 — Section 7 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1746 Of 2023
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

11 paragraphs · 450 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.184 of 2023, registered at police station Sahaspur, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 147, 148, 153 A, 295, 323, 324, 427, 34, 120 B, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932.

2.

As per the First Information Report, dated 15.07.2023, present applicant and one thousand other persons broke the bikes of several persons, in which several persons were injured and the idol of Shiva was broken on 14.07.2023.

3.

Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate, submits that the applicant was an ex-member of Zila Panchayat, Dehradun, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was not present on the spot at the time of the alleged incident. He is in judicial custody since 16.07.2023 and he is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. Some co-accused persons have been granted bail by the Trial Court and several co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

4.

On the other hand, Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder, has opposed the Bail Application. However, he submits that several co-accused persons have been granted bail by the Trial Court.

5.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

6.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

7.

The Bail Application is allowed.

8.

Let the applicant- Rashid Pehalwan alias Rashid be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned Court with the following conditions:-

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

(ii) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available at the time of interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required.