UKHC010155502025 2026:UHC:5926 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS SABA/46/2025 Rakesh Alias Gopi --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Vikas Singh Yadav, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Dinesh Chauhan and Mr. N.S. Kanyal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. By means of the present second anticipatory bail application, the applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0307 of 2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun, for the offence punishable under Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is not in dispute that the earlier anticipatory bail application preferred by the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.09.2025. 3. As per the prosecution case, the applicant obtained 900.90 grams of jewellery from the complainant on 12.07.2025 and a further 165 grams of jewellery on 22.07.2025 on the pretext of selling the same in the hilly areas and assured the complainant that the sale proceeds would be paid after disposal of the ornaments. However, neither the jewellery nor its sale consideration was returned, thereby giving rise to the present F.I.R. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the dispute is essentially of a civil UKHC010155502025 2026:UHC:5926 nature arising out of business transactions and that no custodial interrogation of the applicant is warranted. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that despite dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail application, the applicant has not cooperated with the investigation. It is submitted that the applicant has deliberately evaded the process of law and has been declared an absconder. It is further submitted that non-bailable warrants have already been issued against him and proceedings under Sections 84 and 85 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for proclamation and attachment, have also been initiated. It is, therefore, contended that the applicant, being a proclaimed absconder and not cooperating with the investigating agency, is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. No material change in circumstances has been brought on record warranting reconsideration of the prayer for anticipatory bail. On the contrary, the material placed before the Court indicates that the applicant has failed to cooperate with the investigation, has evaded the process of law, non-bailable warrants have been issued against him, and proceedings under Sections 84 and 85 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 have also been initiated. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has failed to make out any exceptional case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the second anticipatory bail application is dismissed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 16.07.2026 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dd db7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987 446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.07.17 10:46:31 +05'30'