Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Uttarakhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. March

Amit vs. State of Uttarakhand

Decided on 22 March 2024• Citation: BA1/574/2024• High Court of Uttarakhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                   HIGH   COURT    OF  UTTARAKHAND        AT  NAINITAL              
                           First Bail Application No. 574 of 2024                   
                  Amit                                    ….....Applicant           
                                           Versus                                   
                  State of Uttarakhand                   ….….Respondent             
                  Present:-                                                         
                       Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Advocate for the applicant.         
                       Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A. for the State.                
                       Ms. Manisha Bhandari, Advocate for the informant.            
                  Hon’ble  Ravindra   Maithani,  J. (Oral)                          
                            Applicant Amit  is in judicial custody in Case          
                  Crime  No.0016  of 2023,  under  Section 2(b)(i)/3 of the         
                  U.P. Gangsters and  Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act,      
                  1986,  Police Station- Kankhal, District- Haridwar. He has        
                  sought his release on bail.                                       
                  2.        Heard   learned counsel  for the  parties and           
                  perused  the record.                                              
                  3.        It  is argued   by  learned  counsel  for the           
                  applicant  that co-accused,  having  similar role, have           
                  already been granted bail.                                        
                  4.        This fact is admitted by learned State Counsel.         

                                              2                                     
                  5.        Having  considered, this Court  is of the view          
                  that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to      
                  be enlarged on bail.                                              
                  6.        The bail application is allowed.                        
                  7.        Let the applicant be  released on bail, on his          
                  executing  a personal bond  and  furnishing two  reliable         
                  sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the     
                  court concerned.                                                  
                                                   (Ravindra Maithani, J)           
                                                          22.03.2024                
                  Ravi Bisht