AJAY AMIT KAPRI (AMICUS CURIAE) vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — BA1/1948/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2), 65(1), 87. Disposed: Contested--GRANTED on 08th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010163192025
Filing Number
BA1/8437/2025
Filing Date
14-10-2025
Registration No
BA1/1948/2025
Registration Date
14-10-2025
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
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--GRANTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
AJAY AMIT KAPRI (AMICUS CURIAE)
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-10-2025 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
| 08-05-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 19-02-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 07-01-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 16-12-2025 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
Orders
The Uttarakhand High Court granted bail to the 20-year-old applicant in a case involving charges under BNS sections 137(2), 65(1), 87 and POCSO Act Section 3(ka)/4(ii). The court found the victim's statements materially inconsistent, the medical examination showed no evidence of sexual assault, and concluded the risk of witness tampering was remote since key witnesses had already testified. The applicant was ordered released on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Uttarakhand High Court granted bail to the 20-year-old applicant in a case involving charges under BNS sections 137(2), 65(1), 87 and POCSO Act Section 3(ka)/4(ii). The court found the victim's statements materially inconsistent, the medical examination showed no evidence of sexual assault, and concluded the risk of witness tampering was remote since key witnesses had already testified. The applicant was ordered released on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts