High CourtsSingle Bench

Yogender Rawat vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 20 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 UK CK 0079

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66D
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1228 Of 2023
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

9 paragraphs · 371 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No. 98 of 2021, registered at police station Selaqui, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Section 420, Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

2.

As per the prosecution case, informant lodged the First Information Report that some boys had cheated his 10 year old son of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakh) by playing online video games between 13.05.2021 and 23.05.2021. Charge-sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation.

3.

Heard Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for the State.

4.

Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate, submits that the applicant has not been named in the First Information Report. There was a business transaction between the present applicant and informant. Since the informant had not fulfilled his business obligations, the name of the applicant was mentioned during the investigation. Applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter. Applicant’s left leg is fractured and damaged. His left leg is not functioning smoothly, it requires regular treatment. Applicant has no criminal history. He is in custody since 29.04.2023. He is a permanent resident of District Palwal, Haryana, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

5.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he submits that the applicant has no criminal history.

6.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

7.

The Bail Application is allowed.

8.

Let the applicant- Yogender Rawat be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.