High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 06 UK CK 0524

Mahesh Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 19 June 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 411 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 479 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed by the applicant Mahesh Sharma seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 11 of 2024, registered at Police Station Basant Vihar, District Dehradun under Sections 420, 120B, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2.

As per the First Information Report dated 17.01.2024, the applicant is the father-in-law of the informant. He (informant) was an employee in his mother-in-law’s company S.G. Electricals. Applicant was the proprietor of G.P. Electricals. G.P. Electricals was converted into a partnership firm. Bharat Bhushan Bhatia and Poonam Bhatia became owner of G.P. Electricals. Applicant formed a new partnership firm namely G.P. Electrical. After retirement from G.P. Electricals, the applicant received cheques from UPCL by giving fake bills in the name of G.P. Electricals.

3.

Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

4.

Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate, contended that the applicant, aged about 66 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He received the money in lieu of the work completed by him under the valid tender. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicant was granted interim bail on 30.04.2025. The conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

5.

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, 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, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed and order dated 30.04.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Mahesh Sharma, 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 attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

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

(iii) 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.