Allowed

Amrit Pal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC2 May 2024ABA/219/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought anticipatory bail in a firing/attack case under IPC Sections 307 and others. Counsel argued it was a cross case, applicant was himself injured, and similarly placed co-accused had already been granted bail. The State admitted parity. The Court allowed anticipatory bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; applicant to be released on personal bond with two sureties if arrested, subject to conditions including no contact with witnesses, cooperation with investigation, passport

Amrit Pal Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand — Anticipatory Bail | Uttarakhand HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Anticipatory Bail Application No. 219 of 2024

¶3

Amrit Pal Singh ...Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Uttarakhand and others ...Respondents

¶6

Present:-

¶7

Mr. Basant Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, AGA for the State.

¶8

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

¶9

Delay in filing the counter affidavit is condoned. Delay condonation application (IA No. 2 of 2024) is allowed. Counter affidavit is taken on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 28 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 504 & 506 IPC, Police Station Kelakhera, District Udham Singh Nagar.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶12

According to the FIR, on 20.02.2024, at 10:00 in the morning, the applicant along with the co-accused attacked and opened fire on the injured.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has already been granted interim protection; it is a cross case; the applicant is an injured; he has not been assigned

¶14

¶15

any role in the firing. It is also argued that one co-accused has already been granted bail by the court below and two co-accused having similar role have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶16

Learned State Counsel admits that the co-accused having similar role have already been granted anticipatory bail.

¶17

Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case, in which the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶19

In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”), subject to the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not approach any witness, in any manner, whatsoever.

¶21

(ii) He shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶22

(iii) He shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned.

¶23

(iv) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the

¶24

¶25

order of the court concerned. In case he does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.

¶26

(v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.

¶27

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 02.05.2024

¶28

Avneet/

Amrit Pal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrit Pal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand through District Magistrate

Vivek Alias Babu Vs State of Uttarakhand

Arun Agarwal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Vikas Sharma Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dinesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Uttarakhand

Jeewan Ram Vs State of Uttarakhand