2025:UHC:7446 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 22nd AUGUST, 2025 SECOND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.33 of 2025 Gyanesh Kumar Gupta .....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand and Another ..…Respondents Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Suryakant Maithani, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The present Application has been filed by the applicant-Gyanesh Kumar Gupta seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.42 of 2020 (Criminal Case No.6917 of 2021), registered at Kotwali, Dehradun. 2. The First Anticipatory Bail Application (No.12 of 2021) was disposed of on 23.02.2021. 3. Heard Mr. Suryakant Maithani, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the respondent. 4. Mr. Suryakant Maithani, Advocate, contended that as per the First Information Report dated 07.02.2020, lodged by Senior Manager of Punjab National Bank, M/S Arhan Ali Enterprises took a business loan of Rs.40,00,000/-(Rupees Forty lakh) 1 2025:UHC:7446 through its proprietor Israr Ali. One Smt. Pushpa Adhikari furnished a forged copy of sale-deed as security. Applicant was serving as a Loan Officer in the said bank at that time. He was neither a beneficiary of the alleged mortgage nor did he sign any of the disputed mortgage documents. The equitable mortgage registered of the bank does not bear the applicant’s signature. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Applicant was not arrested during the course of the investigation. He was granted relief in the writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the First Information Report. Now, charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 5. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder, on instruction has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. He submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. 6. 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 2 2025:UHC:7446 circumstances of the case. 7. 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. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Gyanesh Kumar Gupta, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a 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 attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; (ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case; (iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 8. 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. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt:22.08.2025 Neha 3 NEHA BISHT Digitally signed by NEHA BISHT DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6f1c15b6305912b3f008e9a4a8038ee7326b08b2d0e018b01be753f014836d27, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=3D89DC33779FB9677068452F32DE6BA960BFE64D819EE44CA9CCE487B2FE0F92, cn=NEHA BISHT Date: 2025.08.22 18:42:17 +05'30'