Vivek Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC11 Jun 2025BA1/766/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail; bail application BA1 No. 766 of 2025; Uttarakhand High Court; Rakesh Thapliyal J.; decided 11.06.2025; FIR No. 0781 of 2024 dated 13.12.2024; Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun; BNS 2023 Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1), 61(2); IT Act Sections 66(C) and 66(D); charge-sheet filed; no custodial interrogation required; no victim disclosed in FIR or charge-sheet; 17 prosecution witnesses; no previous criminal history; personal bond with two reliable sureties of like amount; bail allowed without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant Vivek Rawat on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶¶4

Vivek Rawat Vs State of Uttarakhand — Cheating and Forgery | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of the applicant Vivek Rawat on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶¶4

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Vivek Rawat, implicated in FIR No. 0781 of 2024 (Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun) for offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1), 61(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the IT Act, is entitled to regular bail. +1 more

¶¶2

Court's answer

Taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and that consequently there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, together with the arguments advanced by the parties, the Court concluded that the applicant deserves bail.

¶¶4

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court allowed the bail application and directed the applicant's release on a personal bond with two reliable sureties of like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted — BA1 No. 766 of 2025, Uttarakhand High Court, decided 11.06.2025 by Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Applicant Vivek Rawat s/o Vijay Singh Rawat, arrested (as stated) on 12.12.2024 in FIR No. 0781 of 2024 dated 13.12.2024 of Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun, sought regular bail for offences alleged under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the IT Act; one Ishwinder Shergil alias Sunny was co-named in the FIR. Counsel contended that neither the FIR nor the charge-sheet disclosed any victim although 17 prosecution witnesses were referred to, that the charge-sheet had already been filed, and that the applicant had no previous criminal history; the Brief Holder for the State did not dispute these facts. Holding that, the charge-sheet having been filed, there was no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, the Court found the applicant deserved bail and allowed the application expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits, directing release on execution of a personal bond and furnishing of two reliable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. No bond amount is specified in the judgment.

¶1

2025:UHC:4843

¶2

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 766 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Vivek Rawat S/o Shri Vijay Singh Rawat, is seeking regular bail in relation to first information report dated 13.12.2024 bearing FIR No. 0781 of 2024, Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun, wherein the present applicant and one Ishwinder Shergil alias Sunny have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(1), 61(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 66(C) and 66(D) of the IT Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was arrested in the said crime on 12.12.2024 though he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. 5. He submit that from the contents of the FIR itself, in which after thorough investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed, no offences cognizable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338 of BNS, 2023 are made out since neither in the FIR, nor in the charge-sheet, there is disclosure of any of the victim. It is submitted that even in the charge-sheet, there is reference of 17 prosecution witnesses, but there is no any reference of any victim. 6. He further submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed, and as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, and, furthermore, the applicant has noprevious criminal history.

¶3

2025:UHC:4843

¶4

7. On the other side, Mr. Himanshu
Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State has not disputed this fact that after through investigation, the charge-sheet has been
filed, and as such, there is no need of
custodial interrogation of the present applicant and having no previous criminal history.
8. After hearing the arguments as
advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that
the charge-sheet has already been filed and as such, there is no need of custodial
interrogation of the present applicant, this
Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
9. Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merit of the case, the
present bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant, namely, Vivek
Rawat, 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. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 11.06.2025 R.Bisht

¶5

2025:UHC:4843

Vivek Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Rawat 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

Arun Kumar Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Arvind Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sohil Vs State of Uttarakhand

Roop Kishore Vs State of Uttarakhand

Hikmat Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Vishal Tiwari Vs State of Uttarakhand