Sahib vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The applicant – Sahib is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 125, 126(2) and Section 140(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.131 of 2025, registered at Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar.

According to the First Information Report dated 16.04.2025, on 15.04.2025, the applicant placed his motorcycle in front of the informant’s scooter. A Swift car, without registration number, coming from behind hit the informant’s scooter. The informant fell to the ground. Three unknown persons sitting in the car put the informant in the said car. They wanted to extort money from him. When passers-by arrived, they threw him and ran towards the forest.

Heard Mr. M.K. Goyal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has contended that the applicant had supplied wood to the informant. He assured that he will pay balance amount of Rs.23,000/-, but he did not pay. They had a dispute over the remaining balance. Because of this dispute, the informant has falsely implicated the applicant. Applicant did not know the co-accused persons. They were outsiders. Applicant had no connection with them. He had never seen them before the alleged incident. He (applicant) has surrendered before the Magistrate. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. The co-accused Harpreet Singh has been granted bail by this Court. The co-accused Sangat Pal and the co-accused Sanju have been granted bail by the Sessions Court.

Objection to the bail application has not been filed. However, Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief Holder, for the State has opposed the bail application orally.

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 or trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

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

The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Sahib 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.