AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravindra Maithani, J
These two anticipatory bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are decided by this common judgment.
Applicants seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.0401 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 196, 223, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, despite denial of permission for taking procession of Barabfat, the applicants were found in the procession.
Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the procession had never entered in the territory of Uttarakhand. A procession has started from U.P., but it has returned.
Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicants were found in a procession which had no valid permission.
Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail applications deserve to be allowed.
Both these anticipatory bail applications are allowed.
In the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on bail subject to their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties, by each 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) They shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.
(iii) They shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.
(iv) The applicants shall deposit their passports with the AO. The passport 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.