Allowed

Kuldeep Nandrajog v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC27 Oct 2025BA1/2008/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought by an applicant in custody for cheating and conspiracy offences arising from a builder's failure to deliver plots paid for. Court held no reason to keep him detained indefinitely and allowed bail on a personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Kuldeep Nandrajog Vs State of Uttarakhand — Cheating and Forgery | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

2025:UHC:9419

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶4

27^th OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2008 of 2025

¶6

Kuldeep Nandrajog ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Sharang Dhulia, Advocate (through video conferencing) Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder.

¶7

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶8

Applicant - Kuldeep Nandrajog is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 420 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crime No.183 of 2024, registered at Police Station Bahadarabad, District Haridwar.

¶9

2. The informant Smt. Chandra Nagraaj lodged the First Information Report against three persons including the present applicant on 13.04.2024 alleging that she had invested a sum of Rs.28,72,800/- for three plots measuring 240 square yards for each plot in the project namely, “Santoor City” with M/S Octagon Builders and Promoters Private Ltd. The builder has not yet handed over the plot to her. Now, the builder is

¶10

¶11

2025:UHC:9419

¶12

allotting the undeveloped plot.

¶13

3. Heard Mr. Sharang Dhulia, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for respondent.

¶14

4. Mr. Sharang Dhulia, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The informant was dealt with by Vibhu Vishwabandhu, the director of the company, and the entire responsibility of selling the plot was of Vibhu Vishwabandhu. Applicant had no connection with the sale of the plot to the informant. He had not cheated the informant. He had not received any amount from the informant. The company has gone under liquidation. The matter is pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. Applicant is in custody for a long period. The co-accused has been granted bail by the District and Sessions Judge, Haridwar. Applicant is a permanent resident of Delhi, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶15

5 . Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for respondent, has opposed the bail application orally.

¶16

¶17

2025:UHC:9419 6. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

¶18

7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

¶19

8. The Bail Application is allowed.

¶20

9. Let the applicant- Kuldeep Nandrajog be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶21

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶22

Date: 27.10.2025 Pant/

¶23

Kuldeep Nandrajog v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Nandrajog 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

Kheela Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Ikram Vs State of Uttarakhand

Gurvinder Rathi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kuldeep Nandrajog Vs State of Uttarakhand

Varun Kochar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kuldeep Nandrajog Vs State of Uttarakhand