Sushil Kumar Ghod Vs State Outtarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court 2 Jan 2026 Second Anticipatory Bail Application No. 42 Of 2025 (2026) 01 UK CK 0512
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Second Anticipatory Bail Application No. 42 Of 2025

Hon'ble Bench

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Advocates

Gaurav Panwar, Pratiroop Pandey

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471
  • Constitution Of India, 1950 - Article 21

Judgement Text

Translate:

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1. This Application has been filed by the applicant - Sushil Kumar Ghod for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.20 of 2025, registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Dehradun under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The First Anticipatory Bail Application (No.196 of 2025) was dismissed on 18.07.2025 for want of prosecution.

3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Panwar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

4. Mr. Gaurav Panwar, Advocate, submitted that due to miscommunication, the counsel for the applicant could not appear on 18.07.2025.

5. According to the First Information Report, the applicant executed a forged registered sale-deed in favor of the co-accused Surya Prakash Soni on 23.03.2024.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the owner of the property-in-question was late Arvind Kumar Ghod and the present applicant is his son. Applicant was the sole owner of the property in-question. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he was granted interim bail on 08.10.2025 and the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him.

7. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

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 08.10.2025, granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Sushil Kumar Ghod, 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 cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(iii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iv) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

10. 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.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More