High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 03 UK CK 0806

Mohammad Shadab vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 5 March 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 204 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

11 paragraphs · 430 words
1.

The present Application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crime No.373 of 2017 (Criminal Case No.3275 of 2021, “State vs. Mohsin and Others”), registered at Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun.

2.

As per the FI R dated 10.08.2017, on 08.08.2017, a person cam e from I.C.I .C.I. Bank, Branch Hathi Barkala and told the informant that a loan of Rs.10.00 Lakh has been sanctioned in his favour and he has com e for verification while the inform ant did not apply for any loan. The First Information Report was registered against unknown person.

3.

Heard Mr. Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for applicant through video conferencing and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA assisted by Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the State.

4.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, AGA for the State, on instruction, submitted that charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

5.

Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate, has argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. No reliable evidence has been found against the present applicant during the course of the investigation. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents, and, charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

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 applicant, Mohammad Shadab, 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 clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the concerned authority will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.