2025:UHC:8182 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 15th SEPTEMBER, 2025 THIRD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2025 Ronak Ali ..... Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Tumul Nainwal, Assistant Government Advocate with Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. This Application for anticipatory bail has been filed in Case Crime No.332 of 2019, registered at Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. First Anticipatory Bail Application (No.10 of 2020) was disposed of on 24.11.2020 and the Second Anticipatory Bail Application (No.28 of 2025) was dismissed as withdrawn on 31.07.2025 granting liberty to the applicant to file afresh with better particulars. 3. According to the First Information Report dated 12.08.2019, on the basis of a forged power of attorney, allegedly executed by one Vinod Kumar, the applicant executed a sale-deed in favour of the informant on 19.06.2010 and when it was revealed that the power of 1 2025:UHC:8182 attorney was a forged document then a proposal was given by the applicant that he will provide him another property in place of earlier property owned by one Sanjay Sharma. Consequently, a registered sale-deed in favour of the informant’s wife was executed on 16.11.2018. When he (informant) went for mutation, he found that the owner of the said property, namely Jeevan, had already sold it. 4. Heard Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent. 5. Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate, contended that the applicant, aged about 67 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. As per the FIR, negotiations had taken place between the parties regarding the sale-deed dated 19.06.2010 in the shape of sale-deed dated 16.11.2018. One Sanjay Sharma had purchased the land-in-question by its owner Jeevan s/o Mangu through a registered sale-deed dated 16.01.2017 and thereafter the same was sold to the informant’s wife on 16.11.2018. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. 6. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, Assistant Government Advocate, on instructions, has opposed the anticipatory bail 2 2025:UHC:8182 application orally. 7. 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 circumstances of the case. 8. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Ronak Ali, 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. 9. 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. Date: 15.09.2025 Shiv/ 3