IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at stake, provided there are no compelling reasons for denial.

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Verma, J.

The present Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for Anticipatory Bail under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 7A and Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in connection with the Case Crime No.40 of 2020 (Special Sessions Trial No.02 of 2023), registered at police station I.T.I. District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. A Special Investigation Team was constituted in compliance with the order of this Court, passed in Writ Petition (PIL) No.33 of 2019 in the scholarship scam matter. Mr. G.B. Joshi, the Inspector, was appointed as a member of the Special Investigation Team. He enquired the matter and lodged an FIR on 29.01.2020. The First Information Report was registered against the Manager and Owner of Millennium Institute of Technology, Biharigarh (Uttar Pradesh) and co-accused.

3. Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for State.

4. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The Institute, namely, “Millennium Institute of Technology, Biharigarh (Uttar Pradesh)”, was run by a Society, namely, “Society for Research and Technical Studies”. The present applicant was the Secretary of the said Society. A demand was sent by the Institute in respect of 14 students in two parts vide letter dated 22.10.2012 demanding Rs.80,250/- per student for B.Tech. courses and Rs.39,070/- for Polytechnic courses. The scholarship amount was sent directly in the account of the concerned students, who were enrolled with the Uttar Pradesh Technical University. The Institute-in-question stopped taking admission from the year, 2015 and the students who were studying in the Institute were permitted to complete their courses by the year, 2018, and, since 2018, the said institute was completely closed down.

5. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate further contended that the applicant had not received any scholarship amount. He is not a previous convict. He is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding. He was not arrested during the investigation and all the relevant documents have already been filed by the Investigating Officer along with the charge-sheet.

6. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, A.G.A. has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally. However, he has submitted on instructions that the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, the Investigating Officer does not want to interrogate the applicant.

7. 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.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, applicant–Shalabh Rai is directed to be released on Anticipatory Bail, in the event of his arrest, on furnishing his personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount on the following conditions:-

(i) Applicant shall attend the Trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

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

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Trial Court.

9. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the concerned authority will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

10. Anticipatory Bail Application (No.503 of 2024) stands disposed of accordingly.