Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/593/2025 on 1 July, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
2025:UHC:5555
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1/593/2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Ms. Sukhwani Singh, learned counsel for the
applicant.
2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the
State.
3. Present applicant Mohd. Tanveer is praying for
regular bail in relation to FIR dated 26.07.2023, bearing
FIR No. 0620 of 2023 registered at P.S. Manglaur,
District Haridwar which was lodged against POS
238506557 Alfa Communication, CO Limra
Communication Haidri Chowk for the offences
punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC .
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
on completion of the investigation, charge sheet has
been filed against the present applicant and one
Mohatseen.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant that applicant is innocent and has been
falsely implicated and he is a salaried employee of the
Company and during investigation, owner of the
Company was exonerated. She further submits that
charge sheet has been filed against the present
applicant without any credible evidence and the
applicant is languishing in jail since 09.03.2025 and he
has no previous criminal history and at the time of
arrest, no ground of arrest was given to the applicant,
which in fact is a constitutional mandate and as such,
the arrest of the applicant is bad in law, therefore,
applicant deserves for bail.
6. On the other side, Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned
Brief Holder for the State has seriously opposed the
bail application by submitting that applicant and other
co-accused are involved in sale and activation of 440
SIMS without proper documentation and on the
instruction of Department of Telecommunication a
preliminary inquiry was done and thereafter, the FIR
was lodged and after collecting credible evidence,
applicant and other co-accused were found to be
indulged in this crime, and both of them have been
chargesheeted.
7. He further submits that this aspect cannot be
ruled out that it may be an organized crime linking
with terrorism and cyber fraud and charge sheet has
2025:UHC:5555
been filed after collecting credible evidence, therefore,
applicant does not deserve for bail.
8. I found force on the submission of learned State
Counsel. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the
bail application and the same is rejected.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
01.07.2025.
SKS