Vineet Prasad vs State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(UK) 629

ALOK KUMAR VERMA
Vineet Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Gaurav Singh.
For the Respondent: Akshay Latwal.

JUDGMENT :

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

1. Present Application has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of Anticipatory Bail under Sections 420, 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the Case Crime No. 104 of 2023, registered at police station Gangnahar, District Haridwar.

2. Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant (through video conferencing) and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3. Mr. Akshay Latwal, Brief Holder for the State has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application. He submits that on 08.02.2023, five unknown persons went to the house of the informant by a Vehicle, I-20 (Registration No. DL-7CU-3567). They introduced themselves as Income Tax Officers. They searched his house. He (informant) had kept Rs. 20.00 Lakh (Rupees Twenty Lakh) at his house for the marriage of his daughter, which they took with them. The First Information Report was lodged by the informant-Sudhir Kumar Jain on 11.02.2023. Co-accused Dheeraj and Salman alias Samar were arrested on 22.02.2023. They disclosed the name of the present applicant in their confessional statements.

4. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document