In this bail application, the High Court at Nainital rejected the request for release on bail from the applicant, who is in judicial custody facing charges of forgery and cheating related to a financial loan fraud. The Court found no grounds to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Bail application rejected; applicant remains in judicial custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No. 1170 of 2023
Ankit ...Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Sachin Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. K.S. Bora, D.A.G. for the State.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant Ankit is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 103 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
2
the loan was processed, the photographs was also taken that has also been enclosed with the objections filed by the State.
3
there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 04.12.2023
Jitendra
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, charged with forgery and cheating in a financial fraud case, is eligible for bail.
Whether the seriousness of the offence and impact on economic transactions preclude bail at this stage.
Ankit
State of Uttarakhand
Ravindra Maithani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
