Allowed¶8

Sohil v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC6 Jun 2025BA1/459/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted to applicant Sohil, S/o Salim; bail application BA1/459/2025 decided 06.06.2025 by Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.; offences under Section 109(1) BNS 2023, Section 25(1) B Arms Act, Section 8/21 NDPS Act; FIR dated 16.01.2025, Case Crime No. 35 of 2025 (FIR No. 35 of 2025), P.S. Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar; no recovery of contraband from applicant, contraband recovered from other accused; one country-made pistol recovered from applicant, case of no injury; no previous criminal history; in jail since 16.01.2025; investigation ongoing; bail allowed without expressing opinion on merits; release on personal bond with two reliable sureties of like amount; cooperation with trial required, prosecution free to apply for cancellation of bail otherwise.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Sohil to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned; after release he shall cooperate with the trial, failing which the prosecution is free to move an application for cancellation of bail.

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
			BA1/459/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Dhanik, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant- Sohil, S/o Salim is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 16.01.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 35 of 2025 (FIR No. 35 of 2025) at P.S. Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 109(1) of BNS 2023 read with Section 25(1) B of the Arms Act and Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and furthermore, there is no recovery of any contraband from the present applicant and the contraband which is shown to be recovered is from the other accused. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 16.01.2025. 5. On the other side, learned State counsel has not disputed this fact that there is no recovery of any contraband from the present applicant, however, he submits that one country-made pistol was recovered from the applicant, but this is a case of no injury. He further submits that the investigation is going on. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that there is no recovery of any contraband from the present applicant, and, furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 16.01.2025,

SL.
No.

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

BA1/459/2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1.
Mr. Harsh Vardhan Dhanik, learned
counsel for the applicant.
2.
Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3.
Present applicant- Sohil, S/o Salim is
praying for regular bail in relation to FIR
dated 16.01.2025 registered as Case
Crime No. 35 of 2025 (FIR No. 35 of 2025)
at P.S. Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar
wherein the present applicant has been
implicated for the offences punishable
under Section 109(1) of BNS 2023 read
with Section 25(1) B of the Arms Act and
Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that applicant is innocent and has
been falsely implicated and furthermore,
there is no recovery of any contraband
from
the
present
applicant
and
the
contraband
which
is
shown
to
be
recovered is from the other accused. He
further submits that the applicant has no
previous
criminal
history
and
he
is
languishing in jail since 16.01.2025.
5.
On the other side, learned State
counsel has not disputed this fact that
there is no recovery of any contraband
from the present applicant, however, he
submits that one country-made pistol was
recovered from the applicant, but this is a
case of no injury. He further submits that
the investigation is going on.
6.
After hearing the arguments of the
learned counsel for the parties and further
taking into consideration that there is no
recovery of any contraband from the
present applicant, and, furthermore, the
applicant has no previous criminal history
and is languishing in jail since 16.01.2025,

this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant Sohil be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
9. It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall cooperate with the trial failing which the prosecution is free to move application for cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 06.06.2025 Parul

this Court is of the view that the applicant
deserves for bail.
7.
Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merit of the case, the bail
application is allowed.

8.
Let the applicant Sohil be released
on bail on his executing a personal bond
and furnishing two reliable sureties of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned.

9.
It is made clear that after being
released
on
bail
the
applicant
shall
cooperate with the trial failing which the
prosecution is free to move application for
cancellation of bail.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
06.06.2025
Parul

Sohil v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohil v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Vs State of Uttarakhand

Chaman Babu Vs State of Uttarakhand

Javed Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand

Arvind Vs State of Uttarakhand

Balwant Prakash Vs State of Uttarakhand

Smt. Rajeshwari Devi Vs Director / Registrar