Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual: High Court of Uttarakhand.
Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment, but to secure the attendance of the accused. A single Judge bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Alok Kumar Verma, in the matter of Hari Prakash Agarwal S/O Sri Niranjan Lal Agarwal Vs. State of Uttarakhand (FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1548 of 2021), dealt with an issue where the applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with. In the present case, an FIR was registered against the applicant alleged of having committed the offence under section 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and Section 13(1) (d) and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. An inquiry was conducted in the scholarship scam and upon such inquiry, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Haldwani, nominated the informant Dan Singh Mehta, Sub-Inspector, to initiate the proceeding. After such instruction, an F.I.R. had been lodged by Mr. Dan Singh Mehta on 26.09.2019 alleging therein that the office bearer of Monad University, situated at Hapur, had received Rs. 20,63,900/- towards scholarship amount. It was also found that the amount was misappropriated by the Monad University, the Indian Overseas Bank, Branch Hapur and five middlemen. The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was posted as Branch Manager in the Hapur Branch of District Cooperative Bank Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh where the Monad University had opened the account of its students in the terms of Pradhanmantri Jan Dhan Yojana. The counsel further submitted that the applicant was been implicated in this matter; he is neither the beneficiary of the said scheme nor any amount had been received or transferred in his account; the disputed amount i.e., Rs. 20,63,900/- had already been transferred by the Monad University to the account of the District Social Welfare Department, Nainital. Thereby the counsel prayed for his release on bail. as the charge sheet had already been filed and there there was no chance of tampering with the evidence.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 15421 30TH JULY 2021 …Applicant Between: Hari Prakash Agarwal S o Sri Niranjan Lal Agarwal and State of Uttarakhand. Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Girish Chandra …Respondent Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. T.C. Aggarwal learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal learned Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma J. This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No.42 of 2019 registered with Police Station Bhimtal District Nainital for the offence under Sections 409 420 466 467 468 471 120 B of I.P.C. and Section 13(1)and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. 2 In pursuance to the order dated 04.08.2019 of the Uttarakhand Police Head Quarter Dehradun as well as in compliance of the directions of this High Court passed in Writ Petition(PIL) No. 319 dated 05.07.2019 an enquiry was conducted in the scholarship scam and upon such enquiry the Additional Superintendent of Police Haldwani nominated the informant Dan Singh Mehta Sub Inspector to initiate the proceeding. After such instruction an F.I.R. had been lodged by Mr. Dan Singh Mehta on 26.09.2019 alleging therein that the office bearer of Monad University situated at Hapur had received Rs. 20 63 900 towards scholarship amount. The said amount was misappropriated by the Monad University the Indian Overseas Bank Branch Hapur and five middlemen. Heard Mr. Girish Chandra Lakhchaura learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Aggarwal learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal learned Brief Holder the State through video The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that at the relevant time the applicant was posted as Branch Manager the Hapur Branch of District Cooperative Bank Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh the Monad University opened the account of its students in the terms of Pradhanmantri Jan Dhan Yojana in his bank as per the rules the Bank was given debit authority letter for post matrix reimbursement for the purpose of transfer of amount from the accounts of Monad University every authority letter had the signature of the account holder student the applicant and his subordinate matched and verified the signature of the account holder and after verification the amount was transferred from the accounts of the students to the accounts of Monad University the applicant has been implicated in this matter he is neither the beneficiary of the said scheme nor any amount has been received or transferred in his account the disputed amount i.e. Rs. 20 63 900 has already been transferred by the Monad University to the account of the District Social Welfare Department Nainital the applicant aged about 62 years has no criminal history he is in custody since 31.05.2021 the co accused persons have been granted bail by this High Court charge sheet has already been filed therefore there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Mr. T.C. Aggarwal learned Deputy Advocate General for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant accepted the incomplete R.T.G.S. forms and transferred money to the account of Monad University. However he fairly conceded that it is not clear at this stage that any of the scholarship amount was received by the applicant and if it was received how much was received. He also accepted the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant that the disputed amount of Rs. 20 63 900 has been deposited with the District Social Welfare Department Nainital and the applicant has no criminal history. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period therefore without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Hari Prakash Agarwal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions : i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 10. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail. ALOK KUMAR VERMA J. Dt: 30th July 2021 