High CourtsSingle Bench

Dalveer Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 24 July 2025 · Citation: (2025) 07 UK CK 0713

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 406, 504, 506 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 757 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

12 paragraphs · 466 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed by the applicant-Dalveer Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.103 of 2023, registered at Police Station Tanakpur, District Champawat.

2.

As per the FIR dated 16.09.2023, the informant and his friend Rajvinder Singh send persons abroad for jobs. Applicant and the co-accused Gurdeep Singh had taken Rs.14,17,000/-(Rupees Fourteen Lakh Seventeen Thousand) for providing two boys to the informant and his friend to send them abroad. The said amount was deposited by Rajvinder Singh in the bank account of the applicant and co-accused Gurdeep Singh. Applicant and his friend did not comply with their part of the said agreement. They did not even return his money.

3.

Heard Mrs. Krishi Shukla Bhandari, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for respondent.

4.

Mrs. Krishi Shukla Bhandari, Advocate, submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. All the allegations are baseless and false. Applicant did not receive a single penny in his bank account. Charge-sheet has already been filed under Sections 406, 504 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Summons and warrants, issued by the concerned court, were never served on the applicant. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Ludhiyana, Punjab, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding.

5.

Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned 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, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Dalveer Singh, 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 attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

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

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

8.

It is made clear 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.