Allowed

Anurag Yadav v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC10 Jun 2025ABA/426/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the applicant sought bail for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The High Court, after hearing counsels for both sides, allowed the application and converted interim bail into absolute bail. Various conditions were imposed on the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application allowed; interim bail order made absolute subject to personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two sureties.

Anurag Yadav Vs State of Uttarakhand — Anticipatory Bail | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

2025:UHC:4753

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶4

10^th JUNE, 2025

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 426 OF 2025

¶6

Anurag Yadav

¶7

..... Applicant

¶8

Versus
State of Uttarakhand	..…Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant :	Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent :	Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder.

¶9

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶10

This Application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 152 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun under Sections 305(a), 318(4), 331(3), 351(3) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶11

2. According to the First Information Report dated 23.04.2025, the informant is the partner of the firm M/s Kuldeep Singh Sethi and Gagan Goyal. An agreement dated 20.05.2024 was executed between the informant and the co-accused Kamlesh Kumar Upadhyay to carry out construction work. The informant started construction work but no money was paid by the co-accused and when the money was demanded from the co-accused, the present

¶12

¶13

2025:UHC:4753

¶14

applicant and co-accused abused. Some important documents and a laptop were also stolen.

¶15

3. Heard Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondent.

¶16

4. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The co-accused Kamlesh Kumar Upadhyay has already been granted anticipatory bail.

¶17

5. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Advocate, further submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of District Dehradun. He has no criminal antecedents. He was granted interim bail on 30.04.2025, and, the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

¶18

6 . Learned counsel for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

¶19

7. 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.

¶20

8. 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 30.04.2025, granting interim

¶21

¶22

2025:UHC:4753

¶23

bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Anurag Yadav, 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:-

¶24

(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.

¶25

9. It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or

¶26

violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶27

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶28

Dt : 10.06.2025. Pant/

¶29

Anurag Yadav v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anurag Yadav v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Suryakant Tyagi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Chandan Pathak Vs Mohd Umar Khan

Rajat Sharma (Minor) and Others Vs the Union of India

Kamlesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of Uttarakhand