01Facts
The applicant was in judicial custody in connection with an FIR registered at Police Station Shri Badrinath, District Chamoli, for alleged offences under Sections 306, 316(5), 317(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
¶ 3The prosecution case arose from a preliminary enquiry alleging that he took money during the counting of collections under “Thali Bhet Calculation.”
¶ 3After his arrest on 12 July 2026, ₹5,000 was allegedly recovered at his pointing out on 28 July 2026 from a room in a dharamshala.
¶ 5–8The applicant argued that the recovery was delayed and made from a place accessible to the public and devotees.
¶ 5–8The charge-sheet had been filed, and he sought bail; the State opposed the application but did not dispute the filing of the charge-sheet or the timing of the recovery.
¶ 5–802Issues
i.Whether, in light of the completion of the investigation, the circumstances of the alleged recovery, and the overall facts of the case, the applicant should be released on bail?
¶ 903Law Applied
The alleged offences were under Sections 306, 316(5), 317(2) and 61(2) of the BNS.
¶ 3The judgment does not cite a specific statutory provision governing bail, any precedent, or a separate doctrinal test.
¶ 9It states that the bail decision turned on the nature of the allegations, the stage of the proceedings, the period of incarceration, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case.
¶ 9Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 306Section 316Section 317Section 61
04Reasoning
The Court noted that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been submitted.
¶ 9It also considered that the alleged ₹5,000 recovery was made from a dharamshala room said to be accessible to the public and devotees, and occurred more than sixteen days after the applicant’s arrest.
¶ 9Taking these matters together with the nature of the allegations, the stage of the proceedings, and the period of incarceration, the Court concluded that the applicant had made out a case for bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits.
¶ 905Holding
The Court allowed the bail application and directed the applicant’s release on a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
¶ 10–11Bail was subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses or evidence, cooperation with the investigation and trial, regular attendance unless exempted, no travel outside India without prior permission, and provision of current residential address and mobile number details.
¶ 11The prosecution may seek cancellation of bail if a condition is breached.
¶ 11Original Court PDF
PRAMOD NAUTIYALvsSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
