I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

11^th AUGUST, 2025

ANTI CI PATORY BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 636 of 2025

Irshad ..... Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Birendra Singh

Adhikari, Advocate and Mr.

Mohd. Safdar, Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Nos.1 and 2 Assistant Government

Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate

No.3- Informant

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

This Application has been filed by the applicant-

Irshad seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.10 of 2024, registered at Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun under Sections 420, 467, 468 & Section 471 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860.

2. According to the First Information Report dated 03.01.2024, one Mohan Prasad Kala and Anil Kala purchased a land on 16.09.2004 from Sabarmal Agarwal. The named accused Ashok Kumar sold the land to other person through a forged registered Power of Attorney dated 27.05.2003, whereas Sabarmal Agarwal had not executed

any such power of attorney.

3. Heard Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and Mr. D.S. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3-informant.

4. Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, Advocate contended that the applicant, aged about 62 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was only a witness to the said power of attorney. The named accused Ashok Kumar has been granted interim relief by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents, and, he is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. He was granted interim bail on 16.06.2025, and, the conditions of interim bail have not been violated by him.

5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 & Mr. D.S. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 - informant have opposed the anticipatory bail application.

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, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 16.06.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Irshad, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(iii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iv) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

8. It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Date: 11.08.2025 Pant/