Arvind Kanswal vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

This application has been filed for cancellation of bail granted by this Court to respondent no. 2 (Vinay Bhatt) vide order dated 22.06.2017, in

connection with Case Crime No. 167 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station

Kotwali, District Dehradun. The operative portion of the order dated 22.06.2017 is reproduced below:

“It is the submission of learned senior counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he had issued cheques towards repayment of loan

which he had taken from the complainant. Applicant is languishing in jail since 01.04.017. She also submits that applicant is ready to repay the whole

amount due against him to the complainant but some time may be given to him for this purpose. She further submits that applicant shall deposit a sum

of Rs. 2.50 lacs through cheque before the concerned Magistrate as a condition for bail. Learned senior counsel also submits that remaining amount

shall be deposited by the applicant before the Magistrate concerned within six weeks from the date of issuance of release order of bail.

Having considered submissions for learned senior counsel for the applicant and after going through the contents of F.I.R., half of the amount shall be

deposited by the applicant before Magistrate concerned before release order is issued. The remaining half amount shall be deposited before the

concerned Magistrate within six weeks thereafter.â€​

Notice was issued to respondent no. 2 vide order dated 09.12.2020. As per the office report dated 22.02.2021, notice was served personally upon

respondent no. 2.

Thereafter, the matter was listed on several dates and the Bail Cancellation Application was adjourned to enable respondent no. 2 to put in

appearance. Today also, no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that pursuant to the order of this Court, respondent no. 2 was released from jail in the month of July,

2017; but, he has not fulfilled the condition imposed by this Court, while granting bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that respondent no. 2 had deposited a sum of Rs. 2.50 lacs through bank draft, in the Court of

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, as is reflected from the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 12.07.2017. However, the said bank draft lost its

validity, by efflux of time and, respondent no. 2 was asked to submit revalidated/fresh bank draft and also the remaining amount, however, respondent

no. 2 has not cared to comply the said order, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun on 26.03.2019. The said order is on record at page no. 21

of the Bail Cancellation Application.

In paragraph no. 5 of the Bail Cancellation Application, it has been categorically stated that respondent no. 2 has not complied with the condition

imposed by this Court, while granting bail.

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, this Court is satisfied that respondent no. 2 has violated the condition imposed in the bail order and

he has not cared to deposit the amount, as directed vide order dated 22.06.2017, even after more than three years.

Accordingly, the bail cancellation application is allowed. The bail order dated 22.06.2017, in respect of accused/respondent no.2, is hereby

cancelled, without prejudice to the rights of respondent no. 2 to move a fresh bail application, in case he so desires before this Court. Necessary

coercive measures shall be taken by learned C.J.M., Dehradun to re-arrest the accused/respondent no. 2.

Registry is directed to communicate this order to C.J.M., Dehradun forthwith.