Sukhpreet Singh Alias Vicky vs State Of Uttarakhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2362 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            First Bail Application No. 1602 of 2022

Sukhpreet Singh Alias Vicky                      ...Applicant

                              Versus

State of Uttarakhand                           ...Respondent

Present:-
             Mr. Rahul Sharma and Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Advocates
             for the applicant.
             Mr. V.K. Jemini, D.A.G. with Ms. Meena Bisht, Brief
             Holder, for the State.
             Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Applicant Sukhpreet Singh Alias Vicky is in

judicial custody in Case Crime/FIR No. 188 of 2017, under

Section 420 IPC, Police Station ITI Kashipur, District Udham

Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties through

video conferencing and perused the record.

3. This case has a history. According to the FIR, the

informant gave total Rs. 2.48 crores to the applicant and the

co-accused. But, the money was neither invested nor

returned, as assured. According to the FIR, the applicant was

cheated.

4. In this matter charge sheet has already been filed.

The cognizance order was challenged before this Court in

C482 No. 1435 of 2021 ("first petition"). In the first petition

on 08.10.2021, the Court gave liberty to the applicant and

the co-accused that if they put appearance before the

concerned court and move an application for bail, the same

may be decided in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs.

Central Bureau of Investigation, (2021) 10 SCC 773.

5. It appears that thereafter, on 16.11.2021, the

applicant and the co-accused moved an application for

cancellation of non bailable warrant. But, it was rejected by

the court on the same day, observing that since despite

service of bailable warrant, the applicant did not personally

appeared, he is not entitled to the benefit of the judgment

given in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra). This order

dated 16.11.2021 has further been challenged by the

applicant, in C482 No. 1435 of 2021, in which urgency

application was filed for hearing, but it could not be taken up

for a long. It is stated by learned counsel for the applicant

that it is still pending. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested

and he is in jail.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit

that it is a civil transaction; the applicant has no intention to

disappear; he was never arrested during investigation; after

the order was passed in the first petition on 08.10.2021,

when he moved his application for cancellation of non

bailable warrant, it has been rejected and that order is still

under challenge.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the informant would

submit that he does not have the documents which have

been filed by the applicant alongwith the supplementary

affidavit. He needs those documents so as to file his

objections.

8. List this matter on 01.09.2022 to enable the

informant to file objection, if any. In the meantime, the

applicant shall be released on interim bail subject to his

executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable

sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the

Court concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 29.07.2022 Jitendra