Purushottam Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The present Application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 370 of 2025, registered at Police Station Pathri, District Haridwar under Sections 115(2) , 190, 191(2), 191(3), 304, 324(4), 333, 351(2), 352 and Section 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

As per the First Information Report dated 02.07.2025, the applicant and other six co-accused want to grab the land of the informant. They assaulted the informant and his family members with sticks at about 6:00 p.m. on 28.06.2025. The present applicant, co-accused Aakash and co-accused Lucky pressed the chest of the informant’s wife, snatched her golden chain and threatened to kill. In this incident, the informant’s father was injured.

Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, contended that there is a land dispute between the applicant and the informant. The mother of the applicant filed a complaint against the informant before the Sub-Divisional-Magistrate, Haridwar regarding the land dispute. A Civil Suit (OS No. 15 of 2022) is also pending between the parties before the Court of Ist Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Haridwar in which an interim injunction has been granted to his mother. Due to land dispute, the informant has lodged the present false FIR.

Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, further submitted that the co-accused Aakash and the co-accused Lucky have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Judge, Haridwar. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding.

Mr. Tumul Nainwal, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

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.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Purushottam 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.

It is clarified 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.