Birendra Singh Bhandari vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.0592 of 2024, under Sections 323, 420, 427, 447, 504, 506 and 511 IPC, Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the informant had purchased a property. Its boundary wall, was damaged by the applicant and the co-accused. The police told them not to interfere with the possession of the property of the informant, but, still they are trying to interfere with the possession of the property of the informant.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that maximum punishment for the alleged offence is less than seven years; the applicant has nothing to do with the property of the informant; the property was sold long back.

Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicant had damaged the boundary wall and they are threatening.

Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail subject to his 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 applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:

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

(ii) He shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.

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

(iv) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case, the applicant does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.

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