Ram Avtar Singh v. State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J.:— This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No. 90 of 2020, registered with Police Station Dalanwala, District Dehradun for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 120-B of I.P.C. and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. According to the FIR dated 14.06.2020, in the matter of the scholarship scam, in compliance of the letter dated 17.04.2018 of the Home Department of the State of Uttarakhand, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted. Inspector Mr. Chandrabhan Singh Adhikari, was a member of the Special Investigation Team. After enquiry, the informant, Mr. Chandrabhan Singh Adhikari, Inspector, lodged the said FIR against the owner/manager of Krishna College of Law, Village Kamalpur, Chhutmalpur, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh.

3. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. P.S. Uniyal, the learned Brief Holder for the State.

4. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, the learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that the applicant has been implicated in this matter; the matter in dispute pertains to the year 2014-2015; at the relevant point of time, he was the District Social Welfare Officer, Dehradun; he had transferred the scholarship amount in the account of the concerned students; he has retired from service; no offence has been made out against the applicant; the applicant is in custody since 27.10.2021, the applicant, aged about 68 years, is a permanent resident of District Dehradun and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

5. Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General, opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that at this stage, it is not clear that the applicant had received himself any scholarship amount, and, if received, how much was received.

6. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant Ram Avtar Singh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:—

i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

10. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the Prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.