High CourtsSingle Bench

Tajendra Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 6 May 2025 · Citation: (2025) 05 UK CK 0678

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 121(1), 132, 221 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 278 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

13 paragraphs · 465 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.75 of 2025, registered at Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar under Sections 121(1), 132 and Section 221 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

According to the First Information Report, River Bed Material was being taken by a tractor - trolley on 04.03.2025. The owner of the said vehicle quarreled with the employees of the forest department and took the said vehicle from the spot. The First Information Report was registered against the unknown person.

3.

Heard Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.

4.

Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate, contended that the applicant was not present on the spot. He has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He does not have any criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding, and, he was granted interim bail on 20.03.2025 and the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

5.

Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

6.

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.

7.

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 20.03.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Tajendra Singh, 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.

8.

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.