Gurjant Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1489 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Gurjant Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 3 January, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     Anticipatory Bail Application No.1155 of 2024
Gurjant Singh                                      ........Applicant

                              Versus

State of Uttarakhand                            ........Respondent
Present:-
      Mr. Mehboob Rahi, Advocate for the applicant.
      Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime

No.0160 of 2024, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station

I.T.I., District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, on 29.05.2024, the

applicant along with co-accused attacked the injured

Amit Sharma due to which he sustained injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would

submit that co-accused having similar role have already

been granted bail. Although, non bailable warrant has

allegedly been issued against the applicant but it does not

totally bar entertaining the anticipatory bail. He has

referred to the principles of law as laid down in the case

of Asha Dubey Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal

Appeal No. 4564 of 2024 (SLP (Crl.) No. 13123 of 2024

dated12.11.2024.

5. Learned State Counsel admits that the role of

the applicant and co-accused Raghav is similar, who has

already been granted bail. But, she would submit that

non bailable warrants have already been issued against

the applicant. She would submit that in view of the

judgment as laid down in the case of Srikant Upadhyay

and others vs. State of Bihar and another, 2024 SCC

OnLine 282, the applicant is not entitled to bail.

6. It is true that it in the case of Srikant

Upadhyay (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held

that "At any rate, when warrant of arrest or proclamation

is issued, the applicant is not entitled to invoke the

extraordinary power. Certainly, this will not deprive the

power of the Court to grant pre-arrest bail in extreme,

exceptional cases in the interest of justice."

7. In the case of Asha Dubey (supra), "the Hon'ble

Supreme Court observed that "in the event of the

declaration under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973, it is not as if in all cases that there will

be a total embargo on considering the application for the

grant of anticipatory bail. The Hon'ble Court further

observed that "when the liberty of the appellant is pitted

against, this court will have to see the circumstances of

the case, nature of the offence and the background based

on which such a proclamation was issued.

8. In the instant case, allegations have been

levelled against Nityanand Gupta and others. Nityanand

Gupta has been exonerated. The co-accused having

similar role has already been granted bail.

9. Now, this Court is of the view that merely non

bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant,

his anticipatory bail may not be rejected.

10. Having considered the entirety of facts, this

Court is of the view that it is a fit case for anticipatory

bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to

be allowed.

11. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

12. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall

be enlarged on bail subject to his furnishing a personal

bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the

satisfaction of the Arresting Officer ("AO"). In addition to

it, the applicant shall also comply with the following

conditions: