Gyan Prakash Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

ABA/1128/2023 Gyan Prakash Singh --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht and Mr. Kaushal Sah Jagati, learned counsel for the applicant.

Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

¶2By means of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 38 of 2022, registered at Police Station Mukhani, District Nainital, for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 420 of IPC, 1860.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 19.12.2013, granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant and, in compliance with the conditions stipulated therein, he has duly cooperated with the investigation as and when called upon by the Investigating Officer. It is further submitted that the investigation has since been concluded and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that no material has been brought on record by the prosecution to demonstrate that the

custodial interrogation of the applicant is either necessary or warranted at this stage. It is, therefore, prayed that the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant be confirmed and made absolute.

¶5Learned State Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.

¶6Having heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record, and considered the rival submissions, this Court finds that the applicant has remained protected by virtue of the interim order dated

19.12.2013 and has duly complied with the conditions incorporated therein by extending full cooperation during the course of the investigation. The investigation has culminated in the submission of the charge-sheet before the competent Court. No material has been placed before this Court to indicate that the applicant has misused the liberty granted to him or has failed to cooperate with the investigating agency. It is also not the case of the prosecution that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required at this stage. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, the stage of the proceedings, the conduct of the applicant during the period of interim protection, and the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a fit case for confirmation of the interim anticipatory bail granted earlier.

¶7Consequently, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 19.12.2013 is hereby confirmed and made absolute. The applicant shall remain on anticipatory bail on the same terms and conditions

as contained in the aforesaid order and shall continue to cooperate with the trial proceedings. It shall also be open to the learned trial Court to impose such further conditions, if considered necessary, in accordance with law.

¶8Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed.

(Alok Mahra, J.) 29-07-2026

SB