Uttarakhand High Court
Rahul vs State House Officer And Another on 24 June, 2022
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 54 of 2022
Rahul ...Applicant
Versus
State House Officer and Another ....Respondents
Present:-
Mr. B.M. Molakhi, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. V.K. Gemini, D.A.G. with Ms. Meena Bisht, Brief Holder for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant Rahul seeks anticipatory bail, in FIR No. 0064 of 2021, under Section 420 IPC and 66D of Information Technology Act, 2000, Police Station - Lalkuan, District Nainital.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the informant was cheated telephonically. He was asked to swap some barcode and once he did it, amounts were deducted from his account.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no legally admissible evidence against the applicant.
2
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that co- accused had told it to the Investigating Officer that it is the applicant, who provided forged SIM, etc. to them.
6. When the Court wanted to know as to what is the evidence, which may connect the applicant with the offence except the statement of co-accused?
7. Learned State Counsel would submit that at this stage, the only evidence against the applicant is the statement of the co-accused.
8. Having considered the submissions, this Court is of the view that this is a case fit for anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.
9. The anticipatory bail application is accordingly allowed.
10. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:-
3
(i) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned.
(ii) The applicant shall submit his passports to the Investigating Officer, which shall not be given to the applicant without prior permission of the court.
(iii) The applicant shall in no manner approach any of the witnesses in this case.
(iv) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking on the above.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 24.06.2022 Ravi Bisht