RONAK ALI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Court: High Court of Uttarakhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Uttarakhand judgment dated 2025-11-03. RONAK ALI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
2025:UHC:9696 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA RD 03 NOVEMBER, 2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1196 of 2025 Ronak Ali .. ... Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand .. …Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2016, registered at Police Station Basant Vihar, District Dehradun under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun has rejected the anticipatory bail application of the applicant on 30. 01. 2023 on the ground that at the behest of the applicant, co-accused Mehandi Raza sold the property in-question to one Ujair Ahmad. 3. Heard Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.
Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the 2025:UHC:9696 respondent. 4. Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, Advocate, submitted that the applicant, aged about 67 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He was not named in the First Information Report. He is not a convicted person. The co-accused Mehandi Raza has already been granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant was granted interim bail on 31. 10. 2025. 5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. 6.
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. 7. 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 2025:UHC:9696 the merits of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed and order dated 31. 10. 2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Ronak Ali, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.
30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; (ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case; (iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 8. It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt:03. 11. 2025 Neha
Source: High Court of Uttarakhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.