ANSHUL RATHI vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

UKHC010013762026
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
SL.
Date

No.

2026:UHC:10198

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

BA2/19/2026
Anshul Rathi
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent


Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for
the applicant.
2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl.
Advocate General assisted by Mr. Deepak
Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel
for the complainant.
4. The instant second bail application is
moved on behalf of the applicant Anshul
Rathi, S/o Bijendra Rathi for seeking bail in
relation to Case Crime No.329 of 2024
wherein he is facing trial in Session Trial
No.121 of 2024 State vs. Anshul Rathi &
others for the offences punishable under
Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 452, 504, 506,
34 and 120-B of IPC, P.S. Kotwali Manglaur,
District Haridwar.
5. The first bail application was rejected
by this Court on 13.05.2025.
6. Now the instant second bail application
has been moved on the ground that the
applicant suffered incarceration of more than
two years as he is languishing in jail since
13.05.2024 and there is no substantial
progress in the trial since out of 30
prosecution witnesses uptill date only four

prosecution witnesses have been examined
and in future there is no possibility that trial
would be expedited soon. Learned counsel
submits that applicant have no previous
criminal history and since there is no
substantial progress in the trial, therefore,
applicant cannot detain for an indefinite
period. Apart from this he submits that other
four co-accused Rajesh Kumar, Dheeraj,
Kulveer and Vidhu Rathi have already been
enlarged on bail and role of the applicant is
almost identical to those co-accused, who
have been enlarged on bail and so far as the
recovery of stick is concerned, the same is
doubtful though it is subject matter of trial.
He also apprise that as per the prosecution,
the main accused is Nakul, whose bail is
already rejected by this Court.
7. On the other side Mr. G.S. Sandhu,
learned Addl. Advocate General have not
disputed that uptill date only four
prosecution witnesses have been examined
and he also fairly submits that there is no
such possibility that trial would be expedited
soon since out 30 prosecution witnesses only
four prosecution witnesses has been
examined. Apart from this, he has not
disputed that the other four co-accused have
already been enlarged on bail. So far as the
identical role of the applicant with the other
co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail,
he has some reservation by saying that there
is no recovery of the stick from the
possession of the applicant, therefore, his role
is different to the other co-accused and as
such, he cannot claim the parity of other co-
accused, who have been enlarged on bail.

8. On the other side Mr. Akshay Pradhan,
learned counsel for the complainant submits
that there is no fresh ground in the instant
second bail application and the first bail
application was rejected by a reasoned order
and his role is not identical to the other co-
accused, who have been released on bail,
therefore, he does not deserve for bail.
9. Heard the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties undisputedly, there is
no substantial progress in the trial since out
of 30 prosecution witnesses uptill date only 4
prosecution witnesses have been examined,
therefore, there is no possibility that trial
would be expedited soon. So far as the role of
the applicant is concerned, this Court is not
making any comment on this because it is
subject matter of trial, however it is settled
principle of law that no one can be detained
for an indefinite period, therefore, taking into
consideration that the applicant suffered
incarceration of more than two years and
further he has no criminal history, this Court
is of the view that applicant deserves for bail.
10. Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merit of the case, the instant
second bail application is allowed.
11. Let the present applicant-Anshul Rathi
be released on bail on his executing a
personal bond and furnishing two reliable
sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the court concerned subject to the
following conditions:-
i. After being released on bail the
applicant shall surrender his passport,
if any, with the trial court within three
days.

ii. After being released on bail, the
applicant shall join trial court
proceeding on each and every date
without seeking any unnecessary
adjournment.
iii. Applicant shall not make any
attempt to threaten any of the
whiteness or to temper with the
evidence.


(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
04.11.2026
Arti