Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(UK) 622

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Arvind Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 721, 722 of 2024
Decided On : 30-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Lalit Miglani.
For the Respondent: Pankaj Joshi.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, emphasizing the need for cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on witness contact.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 - Anticipatory bail applications - Applicants sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 286 of 2024 for alleged house trespass and assault - The court found the case fit for anticipatory bail based on the facts presented. (Paras 1-8)
Facts of the case:
The applicants were accused of entering the informant's house, abusing her, and assaulting her, while the applicants claimed they were assaulted first.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the case warranted anticipatory bail.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail given the allegations against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the circumstances justified granting anticipatory bail, emphasizing the need for cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on witness contact.
Result: Anticipatory bail applications allowed.

JUDGMENT :

RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.

1. Since both these anticipatory bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are decided by this common order.

2. Applicants seek anticipatory bail in FIR No. 286 of 2024, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Gangnehar, District Haridwar.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. According to the FIR, on 10.06.2024, the applicants entered into the house of the informant at 11:30 a.m., abused the informant and did maarpeet with her.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, in fact, it is the informant and his family members, who entered into the shop of the applicants and assaulted the applicant Arvind Kumar of which an FIR No. 287 of 2024, Police Station Gangnehar, Roorkee, District Haridwar has been lodged.

6. Learned State counsel would submit that witnesses have supported the prosecution case. He would submit that investigation is pending under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 504 and 506 IPC.

7. Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that this is a case fit for anticipatory bail.

8. The anticipatory bail applications are allowed.

9. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties by each one of them, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the applicants shall also comply with the following conditions:

(i) The applicants shall co-operate with the investigation.

(ii) The applicants shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.

(iv) The applicants shall deposit their passport with the AO. The passports may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicants do not have passport, they shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.

(v) The applicants shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document