TARUN SINGH LAKHA ALIAS LAKKHA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

UKHC010168832026

2026:UHC:9789
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures

SL.
Date
No.

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

BA1/1602/2026


Tarun Singh Lakha Alias Lakkha
--Applicant

Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent

Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, learned
counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Akshay Latwal and Mr.
Prabhat Kandpal, learned A.G.A. along
with Mr. Manoj Bhatt, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
3. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of
the State.
4. This first bail application has been
moved by the applicant seeking regular
bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0187 of
2026, under Section 109(1), 351(3),
352, 3(5), 61(2) of B.N.S. and Section
3/25 of Arms Act, registered at Police
Station Khatima, District Udham Singh
Nagar.
5. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material
available on record.
6. As per the prosecution case, two
persons alighted from a black Scorpio

UKHC010168832026

2026:UHC:9789
vehicle, the registration number of
which had been concealed by smearing
mud on the number plate. One of them
allegedly fired a shot into the air and
thereafter threatened the complainant
with dire consequences. Upon hearing
the gunshot, when other villagers
approached the place of occurrence, the
said persons fled from the spot in the
vehicle. The F.I.R. was lodged against
unknown persons, and during the
course of investigation, the name of the
applicant surfaced as one of the co-
accused.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case
and has been in judicial custody since
09.07.2026. It is contended that
neither any empty cartridge was
recovered from the place of occurrence
nor was the alleged firearm recovered.
Learned counsel further submits that
no specific role has been attributed to
the applicant in the alleged incident
and that his implication in the present
case is not supported by any specific
overt act attributed to him. He would
further submit that the co-accused
persons have been granted bail by this
Court.
8. Per contra, learned State Counsel
has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail. He submits that approximately

UKHC010168832026

2026:UHC:9789
10–15 persons, including the applicant,
had assembled at a hotel situated
about eight kilometres from the place of
occurrence and, pursuant to their
common intention, some of the accused
proceeded to the village and threatened
the complainant. Learned State
Counsel further submits that the
investigation is still in progress and
that the applicant has a criminal
history. He does not dispute that the
co-accused persons with similar role
have been granted bail by this Court.
9. Having considered the
submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties and upon
perusal of the material available on
record, this Court finds that the F.I.R.
was lodged against unknown persons
and the name of the applicant surfaced
during the course of investigation. The
submissions advanced on behalf of the
applicant regarding the absence of
recovery of the alleged firearm and any
empty cartridge from the place of
occurrence, as well as the absence of
any specific role attributed to him, are
matters to be considered at this stage.
The prosecution has also referred to the
alleged assembly of several persons at a
hotel and the applicant’s criminal
history.
10. Having regard to the overall facts
and circumstances of the case, the

UKHC010168832026

2026:UHC:9789
nature of the allegations, the material
presently available on record, this
Court is of the considered view that the
applicant has made out a case for grant
of bail.
11. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed.
Tarun Singh
12. Let the applicant

Lakha Alias Lakkha be released on bail,
on executing personal bond and
furnishing two reliable sureties, each of
like amount, to the satisfaction of Court
concerned.

(Alok Mahra J.)
28.10.2026

Mamta