Abdul Malik vs State Of Uttarakhand on 16 April, 2026

Uttarakhand High Court

Abdul Malik vs State Of Uttarakhand on 16 April, 2026

Author: Alok Kumar Verma

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

                                                                2026:UHC:2714-DB



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA

                       16TH APRIL, 2026

            CRIMINAL APPEAL No.162 of 2025

Abdul Malik                                                      ....Appellant

                                     Versus

State of Uttarakhand                                          ....Respondent


Counsel for the Appellant    :            Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate
                                          with Mr. Vikas Kumar Guglani, Advocate
                                          and Ms. Amitoz Kaur, Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent       :        Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General
                                          with Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Assistant
                                          Government Advocate.


(Per : Shri Alok Kumar Verma, J.)

             Appellant-Abdul Malik is in judicial custody for

the offence punishable under Sections 147, , ,

, , , , , , 120B of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment

Act, 1932, Section 3 and Section 4 of the Prevention of

Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 15

read     with     Section            16     of    the    Unlawful       Activities

(Prevention) Act, 1967 in Case Crime No.22 of 2024,

registered at Police Station Banbhoolpura, Haldwani,

District Nainital.

2.           On      06.02.2025,                 learned       Special      Judge


                                             1
                                            2026:UHC:2714-DB
(U.A.P., Act)/IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani,

District Nainital has rejected the bail application of the

appellant, filed in Special Sessions Trial No.2 of 2024.

3.        In   short,   as   per   the   prosecution,      on

08.02.2024, the police team was present during the

demolition proceedings of the mosque situated in the

Malik ka Bagicha. Meanwhile, the police received an

information that the rioters are setting the police

station on fire. On the said information, the police team

left for the police station. The police personnel were

attacked with stones and firing by individuals from

nearby houses near Karim Hotel. The police vehicles

were set on fire and the police personnel were beaten,

in which, they (police personnel) sustained injuries and

a government revolver along with six cartridges were

looted. Before the said incident, a meeting was held at

the house of the appellant on the night of 30.01.2024.

4.        Heard Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, learned

counsel for the appellant and Mr. J.S. Virk, learned

Deputy Advocate General for the respondent.

5.        Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate, has

contended that the appellant was not present in the

State of Uttarakhand on the date of the incident. He

was in Noida and Delhi. There is no direct evidence


                             2
                                                  2026:UHC:2714-DB
regarding the alleged conspiracy. The entire allegations

against the appellant do not inspire confidence and the

possibility of false implication cannot be completely

ruled out. Appellant has not been convicted by any

court in any criminal case. He has been in custody

since 23.02.2024. He is a permanent resident of

District Nainital, therefore, there is no possibility of his

absconding.    Charge-sheet       has   already    been    filed,

therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the

evidence.    Co-appellants    including    the     co-appellant

Abdul Moied, the son of the appellant, have already

been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court.

6.          On the other hand, Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy

Advocate General appearing for the respondent, has

opposed the appeal and submitted that the present

appellant and his son Abdul Moied were the main

conspirators of the incident. However, he has fairly

conceded that as per the investigation, the appellant

was not present at the spot on 08.02.2024, and, the

co-appellant Abdul Moied has been granted bail by the

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

7.          Having considered the submissions of the

parties, this Court is of the view that the appellant is


                              3
                                                           2026:UHC:2714-DB
entitled to be released on bail at this stage.

8.               Accordingly,   the       present    Criminal     Appeal

(CRLA No.162 of 2025) is allowed. The order dated

06.02.2025, passed by learned Special Judge (U.A.P.,

Act)/IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District

Naintal in Special Sessions Trial No.2 of 2024, is hereby

set aside. The appellant-Abdul Malik is directed to be

released on bail, if he is not wanted in any other

criminal case, on furnishing a personal bond and two

reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the Special Judge,

subject to the following conditions:-

           (i)   Appellant shall attend the trial court regularly
           and    he   shall    not       seek      any     unnecessary
           adjournment;
           (ii) Appellant shall not directly or indirectly make
           any inducement, threat or promise to any person,
           acquainted with the facts of this case.
           (iii) Appellant shall not leave the country without
           the previous permission of the trial court.


                                           __________________
                                            Alok Kumar Verma, J.

____________
Alok Mahra, J.
Date: 16.04.2026
JKJ/Pant

4

SPONSORED