Allowed¶7

Rakhi Saini v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC7 Jul 2026BA1/1014/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rakhi Saini regular bail allowed; Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act; FIR No. 06 of 2026 dated 24.03.2026, P.S. Vigilance Establishment, Dehradun; Vigilance trap, arrest 26.03.2026; co-accused District Project Officer Dharamveer Singh, notice under Section 35 (3) BNSS 2023; lady accused, privilege Section 480 BNSS 2023; charge sheet filed; no criminal antecedent; unblemished service record; Justice Rakesh Thapliyal; personal bond and two sureties; order dated 07.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Release of Rakhi Saini on bail on furnishing her personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶7

Rakhi Saini Vs State of Uttarakhand — Corruption | Uttarakhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of Rakhi Saini on bail on furnishing her personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Rakhi Saini, implicated along with District Project Officer Dharamveer Singh for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act in FIR No. 06 of 2026 (P.S. Vigilance Establishment, Dehradun), deserves regular bail.

¶6

Court's answer

After hearing the rival submissions, and taking into consideration that the applicant is a lady serving as Supervisor in a Government Department, that the charge sheet has already been filed, and that she is languishing in jail since 26.03.2026, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

The applicant, being a lady, deserves the benefit of the privilege of Section 480 BNSS, 2023.

¶6

Key takeaways

Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.ratio¶7
The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing her personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail Application (BA1/1014/2026), Uttarakhand High Court, Rakesh Thapliyal, J., order dated 07.07.2026: Regular bail allowed to Rakhi Saini, w/o Rajeev Kumar, a lady Supervisor in a Government department, arraigned with co-accused District Project Officer Dharamveer Singh under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act in FIR No. 06 of 2026 dated 24.03.2026, P.S. Vigilance Establishment, Dehradun, arising from a Vigilance trap in which she was arrested on 26.03.2026. Charge sheet stood filed; no criminal antecedents; unblemished service record; the co-accused District Project Officer was never arrested, only a notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, 2023 being issued to him. Holding that, being a lady, the applicant deserves the privilege of Section 480 BNSS, 2023, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court released her on a personal bond and two sureties of like amount.

¶1

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
			UKHC010098882026 BA1/1014/2026 Rakhi Saini --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Ms. Anmol Sandhu and Ms. Suraiya Naaz, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant “Rakhi Saini, wife of Rajeev Kumar”, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 24.03.2026 bearing FIR No. 06 of 2026 registered at Police Station – Vigilance Establishment, District – Dehradun wherein the present applicant along with one Dharamveer Singh, District Project Officer, have been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is serving as Supervisor in the office of District Project Officer under the subordination of other co-accused Dharamveer Singh, who is serving as District Project Officer. He submits that for redressal of the grievance of the complainant, in fact, District Project Officer was the Authority and she has nothing to do with the grievance of the complainant and despite this, trap was conducted by the Vigilance Establishment and applicant was trapped and arrested on 26.03.2026. He further submits that District Project Officer was never been arrested during investigation and only notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, 2023 was given to him though he was the only authority competent to redress the grievance of the complainant and applicant has no criminal antecedent

¶2

and she has unblemished service record and no disciplinary proceeding, whatsoever, has been initiated against the applicant. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed and daughter of the applicant is suffering from schizophrenia and her presence is required for her better treatment. 5. On the other side, learned AGA have opposed the bail application by submitting that applicant was caught red handed in the trap conducted by the Vigilance Department and her superior has not been left out and also chargesheeted, however, he has not disputed that applicant has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail 26.03.2026 and charge sheet has already been filed and applicant has unblemished service record.
6. After hearing the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that present applicant is a lady serving as Supervisor in Government Department and charge sheet has already been filed and is languishing in jail 26.03.2026 and further, she being a lady deserves for benefit of privilege Section 480 BNSS, 2023, this Court is of the view that 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 “Rakhi Saini, wife of Rajeev Kumar” be released on bail on furnishing her personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.07.2026 SKS

and she has unblemished service record and no
disciplinary proceeding, whatsoever, has been initiated
against the applicant. He further submits that charge
sheet has already been filed and daughter of the
applicant is suffering from schizophrenia and her
presence is required for her better treatment.
5.
On the other side, learned AGA have opposed
the bail application by submitting that applicant was
caught red handed in the trap conducted by the
Vigilance Department and her superior has not been
left out and also chargesheeted, however, he has not
disputed that applicant has no criminal antecedent and
is languishing in jail 26.03.2026 and charge sheet has
already been filed and applicant has unblemished
service record.

6.
After hearing the rival submissions of learned
counsel for the parties and taking into consideration
that present applicant is a lady serving as Supervisor
in Government Department and charge sheet has
already been filed and is languishing in jail 26.03.2026
and further, she being a lady deserves for benefit of
privilege Section 480 BNSS, 2023, this Court is of the
view that 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 “Rakhi Saini, wife of Rajeev
Kumar” be released on bail on furnishing her personal
bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
07.07.2026
SKS

Rakhi Saini v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakhi Saini 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

Jasveer Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shahane Alam Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dimpal Pal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kurban Vs State of Uttarakhand

Fardeen Vs State of Uttarakhand

Poonam Jakhnal and Others Vs Union of India and Another