Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7363 (UTT)

NITIN THAPAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

ABA/243/2026 · 2026-06-29

Alok Mahra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010109092026 2026:UHC:5116 SL. No . Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA/243/2026 Nitin Thapar --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Piyush Shrivastav, learned counsel for the applicant. Mrs. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Nikhil Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0189 of 2025, registered under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned State Counsel and perused the record. 4. As per the prosecution case, the complainant received a phone call from a person impersonating his friend Manoj Kumar. The caller informed the complainant that he was out of station, his ATM/Debit Card was not functioning and requested the complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.1,53,441/- in his bank account with an assurance that the amount would be returned upon his return to Khatima. Believing the representation to be genuine, the complainant transferred the said amount in three separate transactions. Subsequently, when Manoj Kumar returned to Khatima, it came to light that he had never made any such request. On inquiry, it was revealed that the transferred amount has not been credited to his account. Accordingly, the First Information Report came to be lodged. UKHC010109092026 2026:UHC:5116 5. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer found that a sum of Rs.50,000/- out of the defrauded amount had been credited into the bank account of the present applicant. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated merely because a portion of the alleged amount was credited into his bank account. It is argued that the applicant has no connection with the alleged offence, has not committed any act constituting cheating and is ready to cooperate with the investigation. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and, therefore, he deserves the protection of anticipatory bail. 7. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the application and submitted that the investigation has disclosed transfer of Rs.50,000/- into the applicant's account from the cheated money. It is submitted that the investigation is at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation may be necessary to ascertain the role of the applicant, trace the money trail and identify the other persons involved in the commission of the offence. 8. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the allegations pertain to a well-planned cyber fraud wherein the complainant was induced to transfer a substantial amount by impersonating his friend. The investigation has prima facie revealed that an amount of Rs.50,000/- out of the cheated money was credited into the bank account of the present applicant. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that a prima facie case is made out against the applicant. Considering the nature of allegations, the material collected during investigation and the requirement of a fair investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 10. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail UKHC010109092026 2026:UHC:5116 application is dismissed. 11. It is clarified that any observation made herein is confined only to the adjudication of the present anticipatory bail application and shall not influence the investigation or the trial on merits. ( Alok Mahra, J.) 29-06-2026 SB SHIKSHA BINJOLA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21 822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E6 7B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA Date: 2026.06.29 13:45:52 +05'30'