IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted when personal liberty is at risk and no evidence warrants custodial interrogation.

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Verma, J.

Present Application has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of Anticipatory Bail under Sections 420, 409, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 7 A, Section 8 and Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in connection with the Case Crime No. 40 of 2020, 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. Inspector G.B. Joshi was a member of the said Team. He enquired the matter. After conducting the enquiry, he lodged the First Information Report on 29.01.2020. After completion of the Investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the present applicant and co-accused persons.

3. Heard Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for State.

4. Opposing the Anticipatory Bail Application, Mr. M.K. Chand, A.G.A., submitted that the present applicant was the District Social Welfare Officer, Udham Singh Nagar. It was the duty of the applicant to disburse the scholarship amount only after physical verification of the concerned students, but, he disbursed the scholarship amount without any physical verification.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate, contended that the Institute-in-question was located outside the State of Uttarakhand and when the scholarship was disbursed, there was no provision of physical verification of the concerned students. The Social Welfare Department, on the basis of details, provided by the concerned institute, had issued cheques of scholarship through different account payee cheques in the name of individual student. Applicant was at no fault in the process of disbursement of the scholarship. There is no evidence on record to connect him with the alleged offence.

6. Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate, further contended that the applicant was granted interim relief in WPCRL No.1124 of 2021, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He has been granted Interim Anticipatory Bail in the present matter. The applicant, aged about 55 years, is a Government Servant, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. The present matter rests on the documentary evidence and all the relevant documents are in possession of the Investigating Officer, and, custodial interrogation is not needed.

7. Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for the State, submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need 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- Jagmohan Singh Kafola 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.

10. 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.

11. Anticipatory Bail Application (No. 658 of 2023) stands disposed of accordingly.