High CourtsSingle Bench

Parikshit Parse vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 18 July 2025 · Citation: (2025) 07 UK CK 0669

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 61(2), 111, 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) · Banning Of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 — Section 3, 21(3) · Uttarakhand Protection Of Interest Of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2005 — Section 3 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 538 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 · 497 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Application has been filed by the applicant-Parikshit Parse seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.7 of 2025, registered at Police Station Devprayag, District Tehri Garhwal under Sections 111, 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 3 read with Section 21(3) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 and Section 3 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2005.

2.

Heard Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

3.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate, contended that the applicant is not named in the First Information Report. His name has come to light in the statement of the co-accused Jitendra Niranjan. Applicant, aged about 53 years, has been falsely implicated by them. Applicant was only service provider to LUCC Society. He is a permanent resident of District Indore (Madhya Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. He is not a convicted person. He was granted interim bail on 22.05.2025, and, the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

4.

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. However, he submitted that the name of the applicant has come to light in the statement of Jitendra Niranjan. Apart from the statement of the co-accused, no other evidence is available against the applicant so far.

5.

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.

6.

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 Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 22.05.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Parikshit Parse, 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.

7.

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.