Sohan Lal Bajaj vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.591 of 2022, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the brother of the informant forged a power of attorney without consent and notice of the siblings and sold the property to the applicant. The forged power of attorney was allegedly made in the year 2001 and the property was allegedly sold in the year 2014.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a case purely civil in nature; applicant is the bona fide purchaser; the power of attorney was never cancelled, which was allegedly prepared in the year 2001.

Learned State Counsel would submit that there is no evidence against the applicant.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case, in which the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation.

(ii) The applicant shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned.

(iv) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicant does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.

(v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.