Ravinder Singh v. St at e of Ut t arakhand

Counsel for t he Applicant : Mr. D.S. Meht a, learned counsel. Counsel for t he St at e : Mr. Vipul Panuli, A.G.A. H o n ’ b l e A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J. This is a bail applicat ion filed under Sect ion 483 of t he Bharat iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit a, 2023 ( corresponding t o Sect ion 439 CrPC) , seeking release of t he applicant , Ravinder Singh Sidhu, who has been in j udicial cust ody since 17.03.2020 in connect ion wit h FI R No. 165/ 2019 regist ered at Police St at ion Mukhani, Dist rict Nainit al, for offences punishable under Sect ions 406, 420, 120B I PC and Sect ion 3 of t he Ut t arakhand Prot ect ion of I nt erest s of Deposit ors ( in Financial Est ablishm ent s) Act , 2005.

2. The allegat ions against t he applicant are of a 1 serious nat ure. I t is alleged t hat t he applicant , being t he CMD of t hree com panies—Kim Fut ure Services Lt d., Kim I nfrast ruct ure and Developers Lt d., and Nect ar Com m ercial St at e Lt d.—in connivance wit h co- accused Jagm ohan Singh ( who is yet t o be apprehended) , induced gullible invest ors wit h prom ises of lucrat ive ret urns and t hereaft er siphoned off large sum s of m oney, estimated to be over ₹2 crore.

3. The com panies allegedly shut down t heir operat ions wit hout set t ling invest or claim s, and t he applicant subsequent ly absconded.

4. Learned counsel for t he applicant subm it t ed t hat t he applicant has rem ained in cont inuous j udicial cust ody for m ore t han four years and eight m ont hs since 17.03.2020 and, prior t o t hat , was in cust ody in a separat e m at t er from 11.10.2018.

5. I t is em phasised t hat t he m axim um punishm ent prescribed for t he offences is seven years, and t he applicant has already undergone a subst ant ial port ion of t hat t erm wit hout conclusion of t rial.

6. I t is furt her subm it t ed t hat t he invest igat ion is com plet e; t he charge sheet was filed as early as July 2021; and m ost of t he evidence is docum ent ary in nat ure, which has already been seized.

7. I t is also urged t hat t he applicant is t he sole breadwinner of his fam ily, which includes his elderly m ot her, and t hat he possesses deep social root s.

8. The learned counsel t he applicant subm it t ed t hat t he set t led principle of law is t hat bail is t he rule and j ail is t he except ion, and relied upon several decisions of t he Hon’ble Suprem e Court in 2 support t hereof.

9. I n Sa n j a y Ch a n d r a v . CBI , ( 2 0 1 2 ) 1 SCC 4 0 , it was held t hat pre- t rial det ent ion should not becom e punit ive, and t hat bail ought not t o be denied m erely on t he ground of seriousness of allegat ions, especially where t here is no apprehension of t he accused absconding or t am pering wit h evidence.

10. Furt her reliance was placed on Sa t e n d e r K u m a r A n t i l v . CBI , 2 0 2 2 SCC On Li n e SC 8 2 5 , wherein t he Hon’ble Court em phasized t he need for a liberal and reform at ive approach in grant ing bail, part icularly where st at ut ory condit ions are sat isfied.

11. The decision in H u ssa i n & A n r . v . Un i o n o f I n d i a , ( 2 0 1 7 ) 5 SCC 7 0 2 was also cit ed t o highlight t hat inordinat e delay in t he t rial process is a valid ground for grant ing bail, as prolonged det ent ion wit hout conclusion of t rial m ay becom e oppressive and unj ust .

12. Per cont ra, learned St at e Counsel opposed t he bail applicat ion, cit ing t he m agnit ude and gravit y of t he financial fraud, which affect ed hundreds of invest ors across m ult iple st at es.

13. I t was subm it t ed t hat t he applicant has crim inal ant ecedent s, wit h sim ilar FI Rs regist ered in Chhat t isgarh, Raj ast han, Ut t ar Pradesh, and Punj ab. Bank account det ails linked t o t he applicant ’s com panies—such as A/ C No. 024005001510 ( I CI CI Bank, Haldwani) and A/ C No. 7515005500000705 ( PNB, Am rit sar) —have been placed on record as evidence of illegal m obilisat ion and diversion of funds.

14. The Court has perused t he record and not es 3 t hat eleven prosecut ion wit nesses have been exam ined so far. The t rial is proceeding, albeit slowly, and t here is no im m ediat e likelihood of it s early conclusion.

15. While t he gravit y of t he offence weighs against t he applicant , t he right t o life and personal libert y under Art icle 21 of t he Const it ut ion, as well as t he presum pt ion of innocence, m ust be balanced in t he present cont ext .

16. I t is significant t hat under Sect ion 479 of t he BNSS, 2023 ( corresponding t o Sect ion 436A CrPC) , an undert rial who has undergone half of t he m axim um sent ence prescribed m ay be considered for release on bail. The applicant has served nearly five years of cust ody, which exceeds t wo- t hirds of t he m axim um sent ence of seven years.

17. There is no allegat ion t hat t he applicant failed t o cooperat e during t he invest igat ion. Furt herm ore, m ost of t he prosecut ion's case rest s on docum ent ary evidence, already collect ed.

18. The Hon’ble Suprem e Court in Sanj ay Chandra ( supra) held t hat , “ The obj ect of bail is t o secure t he appearance of t he accused at t rial by a reasonable am ount of bail. The obj ect is neit her punit ive nor prevent at ive.”

19. The principle laid down in Suprem e Court Legal Aid Com m it t ee v. Union of I ndia, ( 1994) 6 SCC 731, also support s t he proposit ion t hat pre- t rial incarcerat ion m ust not result in punishm ent before convict ion, especially where t he delay is not at t ribut able t o t he accused. 4

20. I n view of t he t ot alit y of circum st ances, t his Court is of t he considered opinion t hat cont inued det ent ion of t he applicant would am ount t o pre- t rial punishm ent . I n t he absence of any m at erial indicat ing t hat t he applicant is likely t o abscond or t am per wit h evidence, a case for bail is clearly m ade out .

22. Accordingly, t he bail applicat ion is allowed. Let t he applicant , Ravinder Singh Sidhu, be released on bail in FI R No. 165/ 2019, Police St at ion Mukhani, Dist rict Nainit al, on his furnishing a personal bond and t wo suret ies, each of like am ount , t o t he sat isfact ion of t he court concerned. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A SH I SH N A I TH A N I , J. Dt : 01.04.2025 SB SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c2 4b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542 D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD 9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA 5