Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception: High Court of Uttarakhand.

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 to secure the attendance of the accused.  A single Judge bench comprising Hon’ble justice Alok Kumar Verma, in the matter of Rajendra Kumar Vs. State of Uttarakhand (FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1615 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 FIR registered with Police Station I.T.I., Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 420, 409, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC and Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

In the present case, as per the FIR in the scholarship scam, in compliance with the order of this High Court, passed in Writ Petition Inspector, the informant, was appointed as a member of the Special Investigation Team (SIT). After enquiry, the inspector, informant lodged an FIR against the owner, officers, and employees of Himalayan College of Education, Sunder Nagar Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, and one middleman.

The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named n the FIR, he was implicated and, neither he was the beneficiary nor did he receive any amount of scholarship. The counsel also stated that the co-accused was granted the stay of arrest and also in no way the applicant can tamper evidence if granted bail because he was in custody since 24.05.2021 and the charge-sheet had already been filed.

The deputy advocate general opposed the bail application but submitted that it was not clear that whether the applicant received any scholarship amount.

The court submitted- “there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage”. Thereby the court allowed the bail application.

Click here For The Judgement


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat