Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 466 (UTT)

SHINY v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2015-09-22

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2015
JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the records. 2. The applicant is in jail being implicated in Case Crime No. 81 of 2013, which has been registered under Sections 384/389/504/109/120-B/468 of I.P.C. and Section 67-A of I.T. Act, P.S. Vasant Vihar, District Dehradun. 3. The charges inter alia against the applicant is that he was in constant touch with one Aiana Roy, who along with some other accused were blackmailing a Civil Servant in Uttarakhand and trying to extort money. As per the prosecution case, though the name of the applicant did not figure in the First Inforamtion Report, but charge-sheet has been filed against him as well, inasmuch as, during the investigation his role has been assigned that he was in constant touch with the main accused – Aiana Roy. 4. The applicant is in jail for the last more than twenty one months i.e. since 14.12.2013. Moreover, the co-accused in this matter Suman Singh Valdia has already been released on bail by this Court. Another co-accused, Amit Garg, who is assigned a much greater participation in this alleged act of extortion, has already been released by the court below. All these facts are admitted by the State counsel. 5. In this case the trial is going on before the learned Sessions Judge in which charges have already been framed and at this stage, therefore, as far as police investigation is concerned, it has been argued that there is no chance of any interference with the investigation. 6. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case as well as evidence available on record, the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed. 7. Let the applicant (Shiny @ Shimy Mack Khan) be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the equal amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 8. It is made clear that any observations made by this Court are only for the purposes of grant of bail. It shall not be taken into consideration at all in any other proceedings.