High CourtsSingle Bench

Abhishek vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 7 August 2025 · Citation: (2025) 08 UK CK 0556

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 303(2), 317(2) · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 892 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 465 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Application has been filed by the applicant- Abhishek seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.131 of 2025, registered at Police Station Khanpur, District Haridwar under Sections 303(2), 317(2) and Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

According to the First Information Report dated 15.05.2025, someone stole the informant’s motorcycle (registration no.UK08 AR 3849) on 13.05.2025. The informant apprehended co-accused Aman on 15.05.2025. His motorcycle was recovered from the same place. Two other persons were present on the spot. They managed to escape. Co-accused Aman told him (informant) that Akshay, the co-accused and Abhishek, the present applicant, ran away after seeing him (informant).

3.

Heard Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

4.

Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate, submitted that the applicant is an innocent person. He has been falsely implicated by the co-accused. Applicant was not present on the spot. The alleged motorcycle was not recovered from his possession. He is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding, and, Akshay, the co-accused of the similar role, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Anticipatory Bail Application No.555 of 2025.

5.

Mr. Tumul Nainwal, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally.

6.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

7.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Abhishek he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/ - and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions: -

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(iii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

(iv) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

8.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.