2025:UHC:6193 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 16th JULY, 2025 SECOND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2025 Ranjeet Singh and Others ..... Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder. Counsel for the Informant/ : Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Victim Advocate. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The present Application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.12 of 2025, registered at Police Station Khanpur, District Haridwar. 2. The First Anticipatory Bail Application (ABA No.134 of 2025) was dismissed on 11.03.2025 as withdrawn by granting liberty to the applicants to file a fresh anticipatory bail application. 1 2025:UHC:6193 3. As per the FIR dated 21.01.2025, the applicants and other co-accused committed marpeet at around 03:30 p.m. on 14.01.2025, in which one Rahul got serious injuries and others also sustained injuries. 4. Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondent and Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, learned counsel for the informant/victim. 5. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate, contended that the informant had pulled down his tractor trolley loaded with sugarcane in the land of the applicants. Therefore, there was some altercation between the parties on the date of the incident. The applicants also sustained injuries in the said incident. An FIR has also been lodged by the applicant no.1. The informant of this case and his associates were aggressors. They have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. 6. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate, further submitted that the applicants are permanent residents of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of their absconding. They are not convicted persons. They were granted interim bail on 21.03.2025, and, the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by 2 2025:UHC:6193 them. 7. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder and Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Advocate, have opposed the anticipatory bail application. 8. 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. 9. 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 Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 21.03.2025, granting interim bail to the applicants, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Ranjeet Singh, Lokesh Kumar and Mukesh, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) Applicants shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 3 2025:UHC:6193 (ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; (iii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case. (iv) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 10. It is made clear that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt: 16.07.2025 Shiv/ 4