PRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Court
Uttarakhand High Court
Case type
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION
Decided on
17-03-2026


2026:UHC:1824
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

th
17 MARCH, 2026

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1283 OF 2025

Pradeep Kumar Sharma ..... Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Another ..…Respondents

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey,
Amicus Curiae.

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present Application for anticipatory bail
has been filed by the applicant Pradeep Kumar Sharma
in Case Crime No. 75 of 2025, registered at Police
Station Nehru Colony, District Dehradun under Section
409 and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The Anticipatory Bail Application (No.1363 of
2025) of the applicant has been rejected by the learned
Sessions Judge, Dehradun on 19.12.2025.
3. According to the respondent, the allegations
against the applicant and co-accused are that they had
spent the amount in some other work inspite of
spending on the work allocated by the Uttar Pradesh
Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Limited, due to which, the
department has suffered a loss of Rs.10,971.65 lakh.

1


2026:UHC:1824

4. The First Information Report has been lodged
by Mr. Sunil Kumar Malik, the Additional Project
Manager of Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam, the
respondent no.2.
5. Notice was issued to the respondent no.2. As
per the report of the registry, notice has been served
on the respondent no.2 through his office. Respondent
no.2 is not present.
6. Heard Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned
Amicus Curiae for the applicant and Mr. Deepak
Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the respondent no.1.
7. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate,
contended that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present matter. He was
superannuated on 31.03.2018 from the post of
Additional General Manager. Now his age is about 68
years. The fund received from the department was
utilized in the work of the department (Nigam).
Therefore, no loss was caused to Nigam. Applicant is
not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of
New Delhi. Ram Prakash Gupta, the co-accused of
similar role, has been granted anticipatory bail by this
Court in Anticipatory Bail Application No.402 of 2025.
2


2026:UHC:1824
Applicant was granted interim bail on 02.01.2026, and,
the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated
or misused by him.
8. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief Holder, has
opposed the anticipatory bail application.
9. 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.
10. 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 02.01.2026,
granting interim bail to the applicant, is made absolute.
It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant
Pradeep Kumar Sharma, 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;
3


2026:UHC:1824
(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.

11. 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 granted to the
applicant.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.


Dt : 17.03.2026
Shiv/

4