IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 22nd day of January 2008 Crl. Bail Application No. 51 of 2008 Order on the Bail Application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Umardaraj S/o Makshud R/o Ram Raheem Colony Jawalapur, P.S. Jawalapur District Haridwar. ………… Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ………… Opposite Party Arising out of Crime No. 425 of 2007 Under Sections: 406, 420, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. Police Station: Jawalapur District: Haridwar Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Government Advocate for the State. In brief, the prosecution story is that the accused-applicant has executed an agreement to sale in favour of the complainant and received an amount of Rs. 5,87,500/- as consideration for the land in question. It was averted that said land belongs to the scheduled caste and the sale deed cannot be executed without the permission of the competent authority. With the same averments, the FIR was lodged by Intazar Ahmad, on 23.08.2007, at 01:10 P.M., with police station Jawalapur, District Haridwar. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that dispute for taking the permission of sale is purely civil in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant as per the agreement. Lastly it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that he has got no criminal history and learned G.A. also could not show any criminal history of the applicant. After considering all the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail, at this stage. Let the applicant Umardaraj be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee. (Dharam Veer, J.) Vacation Judge January 22, 2008 H.Negi