2025:UHC:3238 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA No. 87 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Sadaf, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S Pal, learned AGA for the State. 3. Mr. Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. Present applicant – Rekha, is seeking anticipatory bail in relation to first information report dated 18.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 0595 of 2024, Police Station Gangnahar, District Haridwar, wherein the present applicant, her husband-Rajesh and one Hashita, the daughter of the applicant and 10 unknown persons were implicated for the offences punishable under Section 115(2), 127(2), 310(2), 324(4) of BNS, 2023. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated by respondent/complainant Smt. Manjeet, the wife of Ashok Kumar, who is, in fact, the younger brother of the husband of present applicant. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, in fact, the dispute is relating to a property which in fact was gifted by her father in law by way of a registered gift deed dated 11.01.2017. Apart from this, it is submitted that the son of the present applicant also filed a civil suit on 18.10.2024 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Roorkee, seeking permanent injunction over the property which in fact was gifted by her father in law to the son of the applicant. 7. She also submits that, in fact, there is nothing but a civil dispute in between both of them and the initiation of criminal prosecution appears to be a malicious prosecution with ulterior purposes and motives. 8. On the other side, the learned counsel for 2025:UHC:3238 the complainant submits that the father in law of the complainant was suffering from cancer and just before two months, prior to the death of her father in law, the property in-question was shown to be gifted to the son of the present applicant. It is also submitted that not only this, in respect of the other property, the father executed a will in favour of his three sons and his two daughters with equal shares. 9. It is also argued that the sale deed and the gift deed have been challenged in the civil suits, which are pending for adjudication. 10. On the previous date, both the parties were directed to appear before this Court so that the dispute be settled amicably and this Court interacts with the husband of the present applicant Mr. Rajesh but he is not agreed for any amicable settlement. 11. On the other side, Mr. V.S. Pal, learned AGA argued that after investigation and after collecting credible evidences, the charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, at this juncture, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. Apart from this he submits that since the charge- sheet has already been filed and the investigation has been completed, therefore if the applicant has any grievance, she can challenge the chargesheet in the appropriate forum. 12. Be that as it may, admittedly, the chargesheet has already been filed and if there is a civil dispute then it cannot be said that the proceeding, as initiated on the basis of the FIR, is a malicious prosecution. 13. After hearing the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that since after thorough investigation the charge-sheet has already been filed after collecting credible evidences, the applicant does not deserve for anticipatory bail. 14. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.04.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:3238