ABA/248/2025 of MOHD KALEEM Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 30[TH] APRIL, 2025

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 248 OF 2025

..... Applicant

Mohd. Kaleem

Versus

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present Application has been filed by the applicant-Mohd. Kaleem seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.85 of 2025, registered at Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. According to the First Information Report, the property-in-question was sold by the applicant to the informant through registered sale-deed, while the applicant was not the owner of the said property.

3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for

2025:UHC:3294

the applicant, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the informant.

4. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant had sold the property-in-question through the registered sale-deed to the informant. One Mohd. Fajil filed Civil Suit (O.S. No.406 of 2024) against the present applicant and the informant with the allegations that the property-in-question was joint property and without partition the applicant sold some part to the informant. The informant of the present matter being defendant no.2 in the said original suit appeared and filed his written statement, wherein he stated that he purchased the land-in-question from the applicant, thereafter, his name was mutated and the said property is in his lawful possession.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate contended that

the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He is not previous convict. He is permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. He was granted interim bail on 19.03.2025, and, conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Addl. Advocate General has

opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

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.

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 Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed and order dated 19.03.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Mohd. Kaleem, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing 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:-

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by police officer as and when required; Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall 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.

9.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.

Date: 30.04.2025 JKJ/Pant

___________________

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.