Suraj Nautiyal vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.18 of 2024, under Sections 303 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Kirti Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, Uttarakhand.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant is not named in the FIR. He would submit that there is no evidence against the applicant and police arrested him. He has been named by the co-accused.

Learned State Counsel would submit that no objection, as such, is required to be filed. He would submit that the matter may be decided based on the material available on record. He submits that it is the co-accused who named the applicant as a person who was also involved in the case.

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.