High CourtsSingle Bench

Purshottam Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 15 May 2025 · Citation: (2025) 05 UK CK 0750

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 61(2), 109(1) · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 159 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

14 paragraphs · 462 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.671 of 2024, registered at Police Station Pathri, District Haridwar under Section 109(1) and Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

As per the First Information Report dated 03.12.2024, on 28.11.2024 at around 10-11 hours, two unknown persons opened fire towards the house of the informant.

3.

Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. G.S Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.

4.

Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. A co-accused was arrested. The name of the present applicant came to light in the statements of the arrested co-accused. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding.

5.

Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, further submitted that the applicant was granted interim bail on 17.02.2025. The conditions of interim bail have not been violated by him.

6.

Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General, has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application. However, he conceded that the name of the present applicant has come to light in the statements of the co-accused.

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 for anticipatory bail, is allowed and order dated 17.02.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Purshottam Kumar, 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.

9.

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.