Amara Nigar And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicants seek anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.341 of 2024, under Sections 420 & 506 IPC, Police Station Manglaur, District Haridwar.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the applicants have entered into an agreement to sell some of the properties to the informant, but they did not execute a sale deed.

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been ready and willing to execute the sale deed, but within the stipulated time, as fixed in the agreement, the informant did not come to execute the sale deed. It is argued that had he come forward, the applicant would have executed the sale deed.

Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicants have not authority to execute the sale deed.

On it, learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the father of the applicant no.2 had executed a power of attorney in favour of him. Based on it, he had executed the agreement.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case fit for anticipatory bail.

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

In the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the applicants shall also comply with the following conditions:

(i) The applicants shall co-operate with the investigation.

(ii) The applicants shall not approach any witness, whatsoever.

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.

(iv) The applicants shall deposit their passports with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicants do not have passport, they shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.

(v) The applicants shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.