Sumit Dhiman vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Criminal Case No.3971 of 2023 (Case Crime No.318 of 2022), under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B IPC, Police Station Rajpur, District Dehradun.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, co-accused Alok Kumar Sharma induced the informant to purchase a property claiming that co-accused Mohd. Islam is its lawful owner. An order of revisional court was also shown to the informant to make him believe that, in fact, an order of mutation has already been passed in favour of co-accused Mohd. Islam. Relying on this representation, the informant purchased the property. Subsequently, it was revealed that co-accused Mohd. Islam was not the owner of the property.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that co-accused Mohd. Islam has already been granted bail; the applicant did not commit any wrong; he was merely a witness to the sale deed. The main accused has already settled the dispute with the informant.

Learned State Counsel admits these factual narrations as made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for 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 anticipatory bail subject to 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 concerned court.

(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.