ARMAN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — ABA/234/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 147,148,149,307. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 19th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010106672026
Filing Number
ABA/5083/2026
Filing Date
16-Jun-2026
Registration No
ABA/234/2026
Registration Date
16-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATIONS ( 5 )
Sub-Category
BAIL DURING INVESTIGATION ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
19-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 19-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ARMAN
Adv. GAURAV SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Summary: ABA/234/2026 - Arman v. State of Uttarakhand The court granted anticipatory bail to Arman in connection with FIR No. 350 of 2024 involving charges under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307 for an armed attack near Roorkee. The court found that Arman was falsely implicated based solely on a co-accused's statement, was neither present at the incident nor originally named in the FIR, and no incriminating material was recovered from him. Bail was granted on Rs. 50,000 personal bond with two sureties, subject to cooperation with investigation, non-interference with witnesses, passport deposit, and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
-
18-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
-
18-Jun-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. ABA/234/2026
Summary: ABA/234/2026 - Arman v. State of Uttarakhand The court granted anticipatory bail to Arman in connection with FIR No. 350 of 2024 involving charges under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307 for an armed attack near Roorkee. The court found that Arman was falsely implicated based solely on a co-accused's statement, was neither present at the incident nor originally named in the FIR, and no incriminating material was recovered from him. Bail was granted on Rs. 50,000 personal bond with two sureties, subject to cooperation with investigation, non-interference with witnesses, passport deposit, and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts