Virendra Kumar Kaushik vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0329 of 2021 (Special Sessions Trial No.422 of 2024, State of Uttarakhand Vs. Anoop Kumar Chaudhary and Others), under Sections 420, 120B IPC and Section 3 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2005, Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

State was given time to file objections, which has not been filed.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that during investigation, the applicant was not arrested. He was given notice under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Now, chargesheet has been filed.

These factual aspects are not denied by learned State Counsel.

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 court concerned. In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:-

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

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

(iii) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the court concerned. 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 court concerned.

(iv) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i) & (ii) above.