IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Rajiv Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others – Respondents
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 633 of 2023
Decided On : 14-05-2024
Bail - Anticipatory Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, IPC Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 - The court granted anticipatory bail considering the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents, compliance with prior orders, and the nature of the evidence presented.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in a scholarship scam case, claiming he was falsely implicated as the director of the institute, while he was actually the treasurer. The co-accused allegedly forged his signature to embezzle funds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant had no criminal history, had complied with previous orders, and that the case relied on documentary evidence, thus justifying the grant of anticipatory bail.
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the allegations of embezzlement and his claimed role in the institution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the need for substantial grounds to deny anticipatory bail, especially when the applicant had complied with legal requirements and posed no flight risk.
Result: Anticipatory Bail Application granted with conditions.
JUDGMENT :
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
1. Present Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the applicant-accused Rajiv Bhardwaj for grant of Anticipatory Bail under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in connection with the Case Crime No. 519 of 2019 (Criminal Case No. 1470 of 2020), registered at police station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar.
2. As per the First Information Report dated 18.11.2019, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in the scholarship scam matter in compliance with the letter dated 17.04.2018, issued by the Principal Secretary, Home, State of Uttarkahand. Mr. Bhanu Panwar, the Sub-Inspector, was a member of the said Special Investigation Team. He inquired the matter and lodged the said First Information Report.
3. Heard Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir (through video conferencing), learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.
4. Opposing the Anticipatory Bail Application, Mr. Pratiroop Pande, A.G.A. contended that the present applicant was the Director of the institute-in-question and the bank accounts, where the scholarship of the students was deposited, was in the control of the present applicant. The said alleged students had not taken admission in the said institution nor had they opened their accounts in the bank.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate contended that the applicant, aged about 56 years, has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The Investigating Officer has not submitted proper information with respect to the status of the applicant and wrongly treated him as Director of the institute-in-question. Applicant was the treasurer. The institute-in-question, namely, “Himalayan Doon Academy” was run by a Society, namely “Himalayan Doon Education Society” registered under the Societies Registration Act. The co-accused Gaurav Ratan Sharma is the son of S.K. Sharma (Secretary of the said Society). The co-accused Gaurav Ratan Sharma and his father S.K. Sharma by forging the signature of the applicant have embezzled the scholarship amount. Therefore, immediately after knowing about the said forgery, applicant moved a complaint on 15.02.2020 at police station Bhagwanpur to lodge the First Information Report. The co-accused Gaurav Ratan Sharma embezzled the amount of scholarship, therefore, he was arrested by the police. The present applicant was not operating the bank accounts of the institute-in-question.
6. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate further contended that the applicant has already deposited a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh) before the Social Welfare Department in compliance with the order passed in WPCRL No. 262 of 2020, filed by the applicant to quash the First Information Report. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedent. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. Applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail in the present matter. He has not misused or violated any condition of the interim anticipatory bail. The present case rests on the documentary evidence and all the relevant documents have been filed by the Investigating Officer along with the charge-sheet, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
7. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, A.G.A. submitted that charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.
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. In the facts and circumstances of the case, applicant-Rajiv Bhardwaj 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:
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant demonstrates compliance with legal obligations and poses no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at stake, provided the accused are willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant demonstrates no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence, and personal liberty is a paramount consideration.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant demonstrates no direct involvement in the alleged crime, especially when personal liberty is at stake and the charge-sheet has been filed.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicants demonstrate no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence, and when custodial interrogation is not deemed necessary.
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at stake, especially in the absence of strong evidence or objections from the prosecution.
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at stake and no custodial interrogation is necessary.
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant demonstrates no risk of absconding and when personal liberty is at stake, especially in cases where custodial interrogat....
Anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at stake, and the applicant poses no flight risk or threat to the investigation.
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused demonstrate no flight risk and when the nature of the evidence does not necessitate custodial interrogation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.