Uttarakhand High Court
Ukhc010113782026 vs State Of Uttarakhand on 28 July, 2026
UKHC010113782026
2026:UHC:6493
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
ABA/264/2026
Alijaan
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, learned
counsel for the applicant.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy
Advocate General for the State of
Uttarakhand.
2. By means of the present
application, the applicant seeks grant of
anticipatory bail in connection with
Range Case No. 5/2026-27 dated
18.05.2026, registered under Sections 2,
9, 39, 49, 50 and 51 of the Wild Life
(Protection) Act, 1972, Police Station
Forest Department, District Haridwar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is submitted that the
applicant apprehends his arrest during
the course of investigation and,
therefore, seeks the discretionary relief
of anticipatory bail.
4. Per contra, learned State Counsel,
on the basis of the counter affidavit,
opposes the application and submits
that the applicant is not cooperating
with the investigation despite repeated
opportunities. It is further submitted
that a Non-Bailable Warrant has already
been issued against the applicant and he
has been declared a proclaimed offender.
It is, therefore, contended that the
applicant is not entitled to the
extraordinary discretionary relief of
UKHC010113782026
2026:UHC:6493
anticipatory bail.
5. I have considered the rival
submissions and perused the material
available on record.
6. From the material placed before
this Court, it appears that the applicant
has not cooperated with the
investigation. The record further reveals
that a Non-Bailable Warrant has been
issued against him and he has also been
declared a proclaimed offender. In such
circumstances, the conduct of the
applicant disentitles him from claiming
the equitable and discretionary relief of
anticipatory bail.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court
does not find any good ground to
exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in
favour of the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the present
anticipatory bail application is
dismissed.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
28-07-2026
SB
SHIKSHA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639
BINJOLA
b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F1
8FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA
Date: 2026.07.28 17:47:27 +05’30’
