High CourtsSingle Bench

Prem Kumari And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 17 March 2025 · Citation: (2025) 03 UK CK 0867

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420, 467, 468, 471 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 115(2), 351(2) · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1320 Of 2024
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

14 paragraphs · 569 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 115(2) and Section 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.889 of 2024, registered at Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar.

2.

As per the allegations of the First Information Report, the informant had purchased a property from one Girdhari Lal. Late Girdhari Lal was the husband of the applicant no.1, the father of the applicant no.2, grandfather of the applicant no.3 and relative of the applicant no.4. Applicants are trying to grab the property on the ground that the sale deed was forged.

3.

Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State.

4.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present matter. An Original Suit No. 217 of 2023 has been filed by the applicant no.2 against the informant of the present matter for perpetual injunction. The Civil Court has directed the parties to maintain status quo.

5.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, further submitted that the applicants were granted interim bail on 02.01.2025 and the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by the applicants. Two coaccused, namely Keshav Chawla and Shashi Chawla have been granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Judge, Haridwar. Applicants are perm anent residents of Delhi, therefore, there is no chance of their absconding.

6.

Objection to the anticipatory bail application has not been filed. However, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Addl. Advocate General, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

7.

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.

8.

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 under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is allowed and order dated 02.01.2025, granting interim bail to the applicants, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants-Smt. Prem Kumari, aged about 76 years, Sachin Chawla, Raghav Chawla and Umesh Kumar, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/ - and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions: -

(i) Applicants shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(iii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iv) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

9.

It is made clear that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.