Allowed¶19

Shankar Chandra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Anticipatory Bail – Section 420 IPC (cheating)

Uttarakhand HC9 Jun 2025ABA/621/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail granted; Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital; ABA No.621 of 2025; Shankar Chandra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand; Justice Alok Kumar Verma; decided 09.06.2025; Section 420 IPC cheating/job-fraud; Case Crime No.231 of 2023; FIR dated 11.05.2025; charge-sheet filed; personal bond Rs. 30,000/- with two sureties; Article 21 personal liberty; cancellation clause on misuse.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest, on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- with two reliable sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to conditions regarding trial attendance, non-tampering and travel restrictions. ¶19

Shankar Chandra Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand — Cheating and Forgery | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Shankar Chandra Singh, is entitled to anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.231 of 2023 registered under Section 420 IPC at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

¶10

Court's answer

The anticipatory bail application is allowed; in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Bail is directed on execution of a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- with two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.

¶22

Key takeaways

Release is subject to conditions: regular attendance before the trial court without unnecessary adjournments; no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts; and no leaving the country without previous permission of the trial court.ratio¶23
If the applicant misuses or violates any condition, the prosecution agency is free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.ratio¶26
Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is a very precious fundamental right and should be curtailed only when imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory Bail — Section 420 IPC (cheating) — applicant allegedly obtained Rs.6,65,000/- from informant on promise of securing his son a job (FIR dated 11.05.2025, P.S. Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar) — applicant aged about 71 years, not arrested during investigation, charge-sheet filed, no criminal antecedents — application allowed: release on personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- with two reliable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to conditions (regular trial attendance, no inducement/threat/promise, no departure from country without trial court permission) — prosecution free to seek cancellation on misuse or violation of conditions.

¶1

2025:UHC:4678

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶4

09^TH JUNE, 2025

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.621 of 2025

¶6

Shankar Chandra Singh ..…Applicant Versus

¶7

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Lalit Sharma, 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-Shankar Chandra Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.231 of 2023 (Criminal Case No.1130 of 2024), registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶11

2. As per the First Information Report dated 11.05.2025, the applicant told the informant that he will get his son a job. He took Rs.6,65,000/- (Six Lakh Sixty Five Thousand) from the informant. But, he did not get his son any job.

¶12

3 . Heard Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder

2025:UHC:4678

for the respondent.

4. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. All the allegations are totally false. Applicant, aged about 71 years, is a permanent resident of District Nainital. He was not arrested during the course of the investigation. The charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶17

5 . Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally.

¶18

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.

¶19

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-Shankar Chandra Singh, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two

¶20

¶21

2025:UHC:4678

¶22

reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

¶24

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

¶25

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

¶26

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.

¶27

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶28

Date :09.06.2025 JKJ/Pant

¶29

Shankar Chandra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Chandra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arif Vs State of Uttarakhand

M/S Shri Shani Sai Minerals Vs Punjab National Bank

Akram Vs State of Uttarakhand

Suraj Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Suryakant Tyagi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand