✦ High Court of India · 02 Apr 2025

St at e of Ut t arakhand v. Counsel for t he

Case Details High Court of India · 02 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
02 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,066 words

: Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocat e. Counsel for t he Respondent : Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Addit ional Advocat e General. H o n ’ b l e A l o k Ku m a r Ve r m a ,J. The present Applicat ion has been filed by t he applicant s seeking ant icipat ory bail under Sect ions 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and Sect ion 120B of t he I ndian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crim e No.91 of 2020 ( Crim inal Case No.5468 of 2021) , regist ered at Police St at ion Dalanwala, Dist rict Dehradun. 2 . Pursuant t o let t er dat ed 17.04.2018 of t he Principal Secret ary, Hom e, a Special I nvest igat ion Team was const it ut ed in t he scholarship scam m at t er. Sub- I nspect or Keshwanand Purohit was a m em ber of t he said Special I nvest igat ion Team . The m at t er was enquired. Aft er enquiry, an FI R was lodged against t he owner and m anager of Shriram I nst it ut e of Professional 1 St udies, Meerut ( Ut t ar Pradesh) , Kalka Engineering College, Meerut ( Ut t ar Pradesh) and Kalka I nst it ut e for Research and Advanced St udies, Meerut ( Ut t ar Pradesh) . 3 . Heard Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel t he applicant s and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addit ional Advocat e General for t he St at e. 4 . Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocat e, cont ended t hat t he applicant s were t rust ees of t he Trust , nam ely, Shri Sai Educat ional Welfare Trust . Shriram I nst it ut e of Professional St udies, Meerut ( Ut t ar Pradesh) was run by t he said Trust . The scholarship am ount s were not received by t he applicant s. The scholarship am ount s were direct ly deposit ed t he account s of t he concerned st udent s by t he Social Welfare Depart m ent . Applicant s have not m isused any am ount of t he scholarship. Applicant no.1, aged about 69 years, applicant no.2, aged about 50 years, and t he applicant no.3, aged about 55 years, are not previous convict s. 5 . 6 . Obj ect ion has not been filed. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Addit ional Advocat e General t he St at e has opposed t he ant icipat ory bail applicat ion orally. 2 7 . Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocat e, t he applicant s has furt her subm it t ed t hat int erim relief was grant ed t o t he applicant s in WPCRL No.1810 of 2020, filed under Art icle 226 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia t o quash t he First I nform at ion Report , and, charge- sheet has already been filed, t herefore, t here is no chance of t am pering wit h t he evidence. 8 . Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Addit ional Advocat e General for t he St at e subm it t ed on inst ruct ion t hat charge- sheet has already been subm it t ed, hence, cust odial int errogat ion of t he applicant s is not required. 9 . Personal libert y under Art icle 21 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia is very precious fundam ent al right it should be curt ailed only when it becom es im perat ive according t o t he peculiar fact s and circum st ances of t he case. 1 0 . Having heard t he subm issions of learned counsel for t he part ies and keeping in view of t he fact s and circum st ances of t he case, t he present Applicat ion, filed for ant icipat ory bail, is allowed. I t is direct ed t hat in t he event of arrest of t he applicant s, Sm t . Veena Gupt a, Am it Agarwal and Sushant Mit t al, t hey shall be released on ant icipat ory bail on execut ing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/ - and t wo reliable suret ies, each of t he like 3 am ount , by each one of t hem , t o t he sat isfact ion of t he Arrest ing Officer, subj ect t o t he following condit ions: - t rial court t he t hey shall not seek any ( i) Applicant s shall at t end regularly and unnecessary adj ournm ent ; ( ii) Applicant s shall not direct ly or indirect ly m ake any inducem ent , t hreat or prom ise t o any person, acquaint ed wit h t he fact s of t his case. ( iii) Applicant s shall not t he count ry wit hout t he previous perm ission of t he t rial court . 1 1 . I t is m ade clear t hat if t he applicant s m isuse or violat e any of t he condit ions, im posed upon t hem , t he prosecut ion agency will be free t o m ove t he Court for cancellat ion of t he ant icipat ory bail. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A LOK K UM A R VERM A , J. Dat ed: 02.04.2025 Pant / 4

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments