Udai Singh Alias Vishu v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGES'S

2026:UHC:3653

BA1 No. 699 of 2026 Uday Singh alias Vishu

....Applicant

Vs. State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent Hon 'ble Ash ish Nait han i, J. Mr. Vipul Sharma and Mr. Ajay Joshi, learned counsel for the Applicant

¶2Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

¶3Heard on the Correction Application (IA No. 01 of 2026).

¶4The Correction Application has been filed with the submission that, due to a typographical error, the name of the Applicant has wrongly been mentioned as "Udai" instead of "Uday". The Correction Application is accordingly allowed.

¶5The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant—Uday Singh alias Vishu, S/o Mahesh Pal, R/o 103/2, Jagrati Vihar, Sector-2, Post Office L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut, District Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 0020 of 2026, registered at Police Station Clementown, District Dehradun, for offences punishable under Section 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶6Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.

¶7Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 08.03.2026. It is contended that the injuries sustained by the injured are neither grievous in nature nor inflicted on any vital part of the body. It is further submitted that the Applicant is a student of MCA First Year and had friendly relations with the injured, as both were studying in the same class and college. The injured used to visit the rented accommodation of the Applicant, which, according to the learned counsel, can be verified from the CCTV footage installed at the building as well as from the statements of the Applicant's friends, namely Gaurav and Sagar.

¶8It is further submitted that the Applicant and the injured were in a relationship and the said fact is verifiable from WhatsApp chats and call records obtained during the course of investigation. Learned counsel further contends that the Applicant never had any intention to kill the injured and, in fact, attempted to save her life. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, no offence under Section 109(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 is made out against the Applicant. It is also submitted that the Applicant was not in possession of any knife and that the alleged knife was ordered online by the injured herself. Learned counsel lastly submits that the Applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit.

¶9Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and submitted that the knife used in the commission of offence has been recovered and the allegations against the Applicant are serious in nature.

¶10After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Applicant has been able to make out a fit case for grant of bail.

¶11Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed.

¶12Let the Applicant—Uday Singh alias Vishu be released on bail, upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶13It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove is only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

¶14All pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.)

13.05.2026 Shiksha