SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1223

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Alok Kumar Verma, J
Chahat Chopra and Another – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
ANTI CI PATORY BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 629 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan
For the Respondents: Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj

Anticipatory bail may be granted upon showing that personal liberty must be preserved unless justified by compelling circumstances.

Headnote:The applicants, Chahat Chopra and Smt. Kamini Chopra, sought anticipatory bail under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 and Section 120B IPC, citing false implication by the informant regarding a property sale agreement. The court highlighted that personal liberty is precious and should be restricted only when necessary (para 6). The court allowed the anticipatory bail, subject to conditions including regular attendance at trial, non-interference with witnesses, and restriction on leaving the country (para 7). The order for bail was approved with conditions to ensure compliance.

Table of Content
1. application filed for anticipatory bail citing property fraud. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented by both parties on the bail application. (Para 4 , 5)
3. discussion on the importance of personal liberty. (Para 6)
4. court's ruling on the conditions for granting bail. (Para 7)
5. conditions for bail set to prevent misuse or violation. (Para 8)

Hon’ble Alok Kum ar Verm a,J.

This Application has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 82 of 2024, registered at Police Station Muni-Ki-Reti, District Tehri Garhwal under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. According to the First Information Report dated 16.06.2024, the applicant no.2 Kamini Chopra had entered into an agreement with the informant to sell a property. The informant has given Rs.1,13,00,000/- to the applicant no.2. But, the property was not sold to the informant. The applicant no.1, the son of the applicant no.2, is also involved in this conspiracy.

3. Heard Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent.

4. Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, Advocate, contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present matter. The informant has not complied with the terms of the agreement. Applicants have no criminal antecedents. They are permanent residents of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no possibility of their absconding. They were not arrested during the course of the investigation. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

5. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Additional Advocate General, 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, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Chahat Chopra and Smt. Kamini Chopra, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(ii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

(iii) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

8. It is made clear that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top