Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 73 (UTT)

Umesh Singh Mehra v. State of Uttarakhand

2024-02-14

RAVINDRA MAITHANI

body2024
JUDGMENT : Ravindra Maithani, J. Applicant Umesh Singh Mehra is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 20 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Thana Berinag, District Pithoragarh. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the FIR, co-accused Manish Pathak came close to the informant and induced the informant to deliver him money with regard to some business. At the behest of the co-accused Manish Pathak, according to the FIR, the applicant deposited huge amount in various accounts. Thereafter, the money was not returned. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that he has not induced the informant to deliver any money. Merely money was deposited in his account. He would submit that, in fact, the co-accused Manish Pathak has also cheated the applicant of which a report was lodged by the applicant. It is also argued that it is not case of the prosecution that in any manner, the applicant conspired with the co-accused, so as to cheat the informant. 5. Learned State counsel would submit that money was deposited in the account of the informant at the instance of co-accused Manish Pathak. 6. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial or in any other proceedings. 7. It is not a case of online fraud. What is the case in the FIR is that the co-accused Manish Pathak came close to the informant, developed friendship and thereafter, took huge loan from him under the garb of some business and with the assurance of returning it. But, the money was deposited in the account of the applicant. It is not the prosecution case that the applicant in any manner conspired or induced the informant to deliver the money. 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. The bail application is allowed. 10. 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.