Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2478/2021 on 23 February, 2022
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2478 of 2021
23RD FEBRUARY, 2022
Between:
Harish Nath Goswami ...Applicant
and
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Parikshit Saini.
Counsel for the State : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey,
learned AGA 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.358 of 2019, registered with Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. In the scholarship scam, in compliance of the order of this High Court in Writ Petition (PIL) No.33 of 2019, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted by the State Government. After enquiry, Mr. Bachi Singh Bisht, Senior Sub- Inspector, lodged an FIR against the co-accused persons.
3. Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA appearing for the State.
24. Mr. Parikshit Saini, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submitted that the applicant has been implicated in this matter; at the relevant point of time, he was Assistant Social Welfare Officer, Kashipur; his duty was to verify the list of the concerned students, received from the then District Social Welfare Officer; he had verified the said list in accordance with law; the then District Social Welfare Officer had disbursed the scholarship amount; there was no fault of the applicant in disbursement of the scholarship; the applicant has retired from his service on 30.04.2021; he is in custody since 10.08.2021; he is a permanent resident of District Nainital and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, the learned AGA appearing for the State, opposed the bail application and submitted that the State has suffered a loss due to the wrong verification of the applicant. However, he submitted that during the investigation, no clear evidence has been found that applicant had received any amount of scholarship for himself. He further submitted that no departmental enquiry has been initiated against the applicant till today.
6. 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.
7. 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 merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
8. The bail application is allowed.
39. Let the applicant Harish Nath Goswami 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: 23rd February, 2022 Pant/