HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No. 2431 of 2024 Girish Chandra Bisht ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Vikas Singh Bastta, Advocate with Ms. Sangeeta Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.C. Dumka, AGA for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant Girish Chandra Bisht is in judicial custody in FIR No. 142 of 2024 dated 01.06.2024, under Sections 420, 120B, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Section 3 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 2005 and Section 3/21(3) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, Police Station Kotwali Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the FIR, the informant was working as an agent in the Loni Urban Multi-State Credit & Thrift Co-operative Society, Branch Dugadda, District Pauri Garhwal (“the Society”). She had deposited money with the Manager Vineet Singh and Cashier Pragya Rawat, but she 2 came to know that, in fact, the amount was not deposited in the Society. 4. State was required to file objections. It has not been filed as yet. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is an agent; he is neither a member nor the Director of the Society; the position of the informant and the applicant is one and the same. 6. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the applicant has been assigned the role of training the agent. 7. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding. 8. It is not a case that the money was deposited in the account of the applicant; the informant claims that she was an agent and she deposited the money with one Vineet Singh and Pragya Rawat. What is being claimed is that the applicant is also an agent. 3 9. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 17.02.2025 Avneet/