Uttarakhand High Court
ABA/668/2025 on 23 June, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
2025:UHC:5254
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
ABA No. 668 of 2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Harendra Belwal and Mr. A.M. Saklani,
learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder
for the State.
3. The present applicant’ Sarabjit Singh’ S/o
Hardeep Singh is praying for anticipatory bail in
relation to First Information Report dated 26.07.2023
bearing FRI No. 0254 of 2023 P.S. Kankhal, District
Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant and one
Upendra Singh Madan, the resident of Australia,
were implicated for the offences punishable under
Sections 420 and 506 of IPC.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been
falsely implicated and no amount was credited in
his account. He further submits that no such
assurance of giving appointment was given to the
complainant and absolutely false allegations have
been alleged. He submits that with the vague
allegations an application was moved under Section
156(3) of Cr.P.C., which was allowed pursuant to
which the FIR has been lodged. He further submits
that even as per the allegation alleged in the FIR no
offence cognizable under Sections 420 and 506 of
IPC are made out against the applicant, however,
there is an apprehension of arrest and be granted
anticipatory bail.
5. On the other side, learned Brief Holder for the
State Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj on written instructions
submits that notice under Section 41 was issued to
the present applicant on 12.03.2025 despite this the
applicant has not turned up to join the investigation.
6. Apart from this, a huge amount was also
found to be credited in the account of the co-
accused, who is in direct touch with the present
applicant.
7. After hearing the arguments of learned
counsel for the parties and further taking into
consideration the allegation alleged in the FIR, this
court is of the view that the applicant does not
deserve for any protection.
2025:UHC:5254
8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application is rejected.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
23.06.2025
PR