Karan Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Outcome
Bail granted
The bail application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 109(1), 121(2), 132, 191(3)
- Indian Forest Act, 1927 s. 26
Judgment
Mr. Avidit Noliyal, Advocate for the applicants. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicants-Karan Singh and Surendra Singh @ Chetu are in judicial custody in FIR No. 232 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 121(2), 132, 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 26 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that co-accused, having similar role, has already been granted bail.
This fact is admitted by learned State Counsel. 2
Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Operative part
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Ravi Bisht (Ravindra Maithani, J) 26.03.2025
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The bail application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 109(1), 121(2), 132, 191(3); Indian Forest Act, 1927 — s. 26.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.