Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Neelam Kalla vs State on 18 July, 2017
Author: P.K. Lohra
Bench: P.K. Lohra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
(1) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1676 / 2017
Rajendra Singh Khichi S/o Badan Singh, By Caste Rajput, Resident
of 44-A Azeet Colony, Jodhpur, Posted As Assistant Professor of
Social Study, JNV University, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
(2) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 924 / 2017
Sunil Asopa S/o Shyam Sundar Sharma, Caste Brahmin, R/o 61-D,
Laxmi Nagar, Paota, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(3) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 925 / 2017
Vinita Chauhan W/o Shri Arun Devra, R/o 157, Rajiv Nagar, "C"
Mahamandir Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(4) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 926 / 2017
Manish Vadera S/o Dr. Shri ML Vadera, By Caste Jain, R/o B-05,
Dilip Singh Colony, Near JDA, PWD Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(2 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(5) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1473 / 2017
Neelam Kalla D/o Shri Kailash Chand Joshi W/o Dr. Dinesh Kalla,
By Caste Brahmin, Resident of 181, Chanakya Nagar, Opp Latiyal
Vatika, Pal Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(6) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1678 / 2017
Smt Sharad Shekhawat W/o Rajendra Singh, By Caste Rajput,
Resident of 44-A Azeet Colony, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(7) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1679 / 2017
Kalpana Purohit W/o Shri Ashok Purohit, R/o House No. B-50,
Krishna Nagar, New Pali Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(8) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1680 / 2017
Smt Vinita Parihar W/o late Shri Lalitji Parihar, R/o 1-16, Shastri
Nagar, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(9) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1738 / 2017
Mohit S/o Sh. Amritlal, By Caste Jeengar, Resident of 9-B, Shanker
Nagar, C.H.B. Jodhpur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(3 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(10) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2061 / 2017
Arjundev Charan S/o Revatdan, By Caste Charan, R/o 180, Laxmi
Nagar, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(11) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2062 / 2017
Narendra Avasthi S/o Gopivallabh Avasthi, By Caste Brahimin, R/o
21/54, Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(12) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2063 / 2017
Mahendra Purohit S/o late Shri Jugal Kishore Ji, by caste Purohit,
aged 51 years, R/o 6, University Teachers Flats, Near P.W.D.
Office, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(13) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2064 / 2017
Dr Veenu George S/o Shri Vargish George, By Caste Christian,
Resident of 2/167, Kuri Bhagtasni Housing Board, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(14) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2065 / 2017
Dr Hem Singh Gehlot S/o Shri Kishan Singh Gehlot, Resident of 80
Sankalp, Chaturawata, Chainpura, Mandore, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(4 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(15) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2066 / 2017
Dr. Virendra Singh Parihar S/o Jugraj Parihar, Resident of
Ramsagar, Bhadwasiya Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(16) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2067 / 2017
Dr. Shiv Kumar Barbar S/o Shri Nagarmal Barbar, R/o THF-5,
University Teachers Flats, PWD Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
(17) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2068 / 2017
Dr. Om Prakash S/o Shri Baburam, R/o Warden Residence, MBM
Engineering Hostel No.7, Residency Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
(18) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2069 / 2017
Dr. Nagendra Singh Bhati S/o Prof. P.S. Bhati (Retd.), R/o Vidhya
Park, Air Force Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
(19) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2070 / 2017
Dr. Jaya Bhandari D/o Sh. Narsingh Raj Bhandari, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Jata Bas, Near Moti Chowk, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(5 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(20) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2071 / 2017
Mr. Nishant Gehlot S/o Sh. Kailash Chandra Gehlot, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 299-A, Harinagar, Near B.R. Birla School, Chopasni,
Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(21) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2072 / 2017
Dr. Lekhu Gehlot D/o Shri Babu Lal Gehlot, R/o Sankhlon Ka Bass,
Magra Punjla, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(22) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2073 / 2017
Kamini Ojha W/o Shri Chandra Shekhar Ojha, D/o Shri Chand
Ratan Ji Trivedi, Aged About 40 Years, At Present 273, Ojha Sadan
Shiv Road, Near Kesar Bag, Ratanada, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(23) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2074 / 2017
Dr. Ramesh Kumar Chouhan S/o Pusa Ram Chouhan, By Caste
Jinagar, Resident of House No. 02, B-22, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(24) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2075 / 2017
Dr. Pratibha Sankhla W/o Shri Ajay Sankhla D/o Shri R.C Bhatt,
Resident of F-1, Vardhman Colony, Golf Course, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(6 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(25) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2076 / 2017
Ms. Rachna Dinesh Nee Modi D/o Shri Sharad Chandra Modi,
Resident of 53, Gold Course, M.N Arora Marg, Jodhpur
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(26) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2077 / 2017
Dr. Richa Bohra D/o Shri Anil Bohra, Resident of 1-K-6, Bhagat Ki
Kothi Extension Scheme, H Board, Opp. New Campus, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(27) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2078 / 2017
Dr. Asha Rathi D/o Shri Bachhraj Ji W/o Shri Narayan Lal Rathi,
R/o- 303-A, Gandhi Tower, IInd Floor, Inside Jalori Gate, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(28) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2079 / 2017
Dr. Kamana Sharma D/o Shri Om Dutt Sharma, R/o Shankar
Sadan, Behind Government Girls School, Soorsagar, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(29) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2080 / 2017
1. Dr. Veebha Bhoot D/o Late Laxman Kumar Gopalani W/o Late
Shri Naveen Bhoot, Resident of 101, Gulab Nagar Pal Road,
Jodhpur.
2. Dr. Poonam Punia W/o Ramdayal Choudhary D/o D.R.
Choudhary, By Caste Jat, Resident of B 43, Arvind Nagar,
Golf Course, Ratanada, Jodhpur, At Present Gali No. 2, Shakti
Nagar, Paota C Road, Jodhpur
(7 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
3. Dr. Sangeeta Parihar D/o Shri Shiv Singh Parihar, Resident of
20-A, Gayatri Vihar, Bhaskar Circle, Ratanada, Jodhpur.
4. Ranji Kant Trivedi S/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Trivedi, Resident
of 206, First C Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(30) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2081 / 2017
1. Lalit Singh Jhala S/o Shri Rameshwar Singh Jhala, By Caste
Rajput, Resident of 68 Bhatyani Chouhta, in Front of
Ghasghar, Udaipur, At Present 3-H/3, University Residential
Colony, Jodhpur
2. Dr. Amita Dhariwal D/o Shri Pukhraj Garu, Resident of 29,
Keshar Bagh, Near Central Jail, Ratanada, Jodhpur.
3. Dr. Seema Parveen D/o Shri Mohd. Haroon, Resident of 120,
Nai Sarak, Janta Bartan Bhandar, Jodhpur.
4. Dr. Rakhi Vyas D/o Shri Murlimanohar Vyas, Resident of 144,
Saraswati Nagar, in Front of Ram Chemicals, Dharamkanta,
Basani, Jodhpur at Present 101,102 Vishal Nagar, New Pali
Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(31) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2188 / 2017
Ramchander Singh Rajpurohit S/o Vijay Singh, By Caste
Rajpurohit, R/o 36, Abhaygarh Scheme, Air Force, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(32) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2348 / 2017
Ashish Mathur S/o Professor Shri Naveen Mathur, By Caste Mathur,
Resident of M/s K.P Haweli, Naya Bas, Killi Khana, Jodhpur
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(8 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(33) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2349 / 2017
Mrs. Puja Gehlot W/o Mr. Rajesh Gehlot, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
"Kanwar Sen", Lal Maidan, Paota C Road, Near Central Academy
School, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(34) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2350 / 2017
Yamini Sharma D/o Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma, Aged About 27
Years, By Caste, Shrimali Brahmin, R/o Warden, M.B.M.
Engineering College, Jodhpur (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
----Respondent
(35) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2631 / 2017
Dr. Ummed Raj Tater S/o Shri Ghewar Chand Tater, By Caste
Oswal, Resident of Tatero Ka Bas, Mahamandir, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(36) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2632 / 2017
Professor M.B. Shukla S/o Late Ram Harsh Shukla, Aged About 63
Years, Professor, Faculty of Commerce & Management Studies,
Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidhyapeeth, Varanasi.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(9 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(37) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 2633 / 2017
Professor Nawal Kishore S/o Late S.N. Poddar, Aged About 55
Years, Presently Professor, School of Management Indira Gandhi
National Open University, New Delhi.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(38) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 3558 / 2017
Dr. Jugal Kishore Sharma S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma, R/o 13,
Roop Nagar, Paota C Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Bora, Senior Advocate with Mr.
Nishant Bora and Mr. Arun Kumar, Mr. J.S.
Choudhary, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tarun
Dhaka and Mr. Amardeep Lamba, Mr. Rajesh
Joshi Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vineet R. Dave,
Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, Mr. Dhirendra Singh,
Sunil Joshi, Mr. Vikas Balia with Mr. Pramod
Vyas, Mr. Sudheer Tak, Mr. Vineet Jain, Mr.
M.S. Purohit, Mr. JVS Deora, Mr. Pritam
Solanki, Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Mr. Vinod
Sharma, Mr. Rameshwar Dave.
For Respondent-State: Mr. S.K. Vyas, AAG with Mr. Deepak
Choudhary and Mr. K.V. Vyas, PP.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Order 18/07/2017 FIR No.269/14 of ACB, Jaipur, outpost Jodhpur, for alleged irregularities/illegalities in the selection of teachers of Jai Narain Vyas University in terms of advertisement No.74/2011-12 and the investigation carried out pursuant thereto, has prompted all the petitioners to lay these 38 pre-arrest bail applications with a view (10 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] to thwart their arrests. Their efforts to seek bail from Special Judge, Sessions Court (Prevention of Corruption Act), Jodhpur (for short, 'learned trial Court) proved abortive.
Initially, in the FIR edificed on preliminary inquiry No.44/2013, it was unearthed that certain irregularities/illegalities were committed in the selection process for the posts of Assistant Professors/Associate Professor in various subjects by giving complete go-bye to the requisite qualifications for the said post in utter disregard to the UGC Regulation. That apart, the inquiry also revealed alleged favoritism and nepotism in the selection process. The original FIR contained names of about 10 persons including the then Vice Chancellor of the University and some of the petitioners. With the advent of time, when the investigation progressed further, it embraced the names of all other petitioners besides a few more looming threat of their arrest.
The FIR aforesaid was founded on many allegations constituting offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c)(d), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120-B IPC. Later on, the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 201 & 119 IPC were also added.
As all these bail applications are founded on one FIR, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
(11 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] For convenience, all these bail applications are segregated into three categories; (1) Selected candidates (beneficiaries), (2) Members of Scrutiny Committee, and (3) Members of Selection Committee, the details whereof is as under:
(1) Selected candidates (beneficiaries):
Sl. Names Post on which Bail
No. appointment given Application
No.
1. Rajendra Singh Assistant Professor 1676/2017
Khichi (Sociology)
2. Sunil Asopa Associate Professor (Law) 924/2017
3. Vinita Chouhan Assistant Professor 925/2017
(Hindi)
4. Manish Vadera Assistant Professor 926/2017
(Business Administration)
5. Neelam Kalla Assistant Professor 1473/2017
(Management Studies)
(different ordinance for
selection, Ph.D. not
necessary)
6. Smt. Sharad Assistant Professor 1678/2017
Shekhawat (Public Administration)
7. Mohit Assistant Professor 1738/2017
(English) [Resigned after
appointment]
8. Mahendra Purohit Assistant Professor 2063/2017
(History)
9. Dr. Veenu George Assistant Professor 2064/2017
(English)
10. Dr. Hem Singh Assistant Professor 2065/2017
Gehlot (Zoology)
11. Dr. Virendra Singh Assistant Professor 2066/2017
(12 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
Parihar (Geology)
12. Dr. Shiv Kumar Assistant Professor 2067/2017
Barbar (Physics)
13. Dr. Om Prakash Assistant Professor 2068/2017
(Chemistry)
14. Dr. Nagendra Singh Assistant Professor 2069/2017
(Political Sci.)
15. Dr. Jaya Bhandari Assistant Professor 2070/2017
(Economics)
16. Nishant Gehlot Assistant Professor 2071/2017
(Management Studies)
(different ordinance for
selection, Ph.D. not
necessary)
17. Dr. Lekhu Gehlot Assistant Professor 2072/2017
(Zoology)
18. Kamini Ojha Assistant Professor 2073/2017
(Hindi)
19. Dr. Ramesh Kumar Assistant Professor 2074/2017
Chouhan (Business Administration)
20. Dr. Pratibha Sankhla Assistant Professor 2075/2017
(History)
21. Rachna Dinesh Nee Assistant Professor 2076/2017
Modi (Botany)
22. Dr. Richa Bohra Assistant Professor 2077/2017
(English)
23. Dr. Asha Rathi Assistant Professor 2078/2017
(Business Administration)
24. Dr. Kamana Sharma Assistant Professor 2079/2017
(Botany)
25. (i) Dr. Vibha Bhoot, (i) Assistant Professor 2080/2017
(ii) Dr. Poonam (English)
Punia, (iii) Dr.
(ii)Assistant Professor
Sangita Parihar, (iv)
(Zoology)
Rajni Kant Trivedi
(iii) Assistant Professor
(13 of 21)
[CRLMB-1676/2017]
(Chemistry)
(iv) Assistant Professor
(Economics)
26. (i) Lalit Singh Jhala, (i) Assistant Professor 2081/2017
(ii) Dr. Amita (Geography)
Dhariwal, (iii) Dr.
(ii) Assistant Professor
Seema Parveen, (iv)
(Chemistry)
Dr. Rakhi Vyas
(iii) Assistant Professor
(Chemistry)
(iv) Assistant Professor
(English)
27. Ashish Mathur Assistant Professor 2348/2017
(Business Administration)
28. Puja Gehlot Assistant Professor 2349/2017
(Management Studies)
(different ordinance for
selection, Ph.D. not
necessary)
29. Yamini Sharma Assistant Professor 2350/2017
(Management Studies)
(different ordinance for
selection, Ph.D. not
necessary)
30. Dr. Ummed Raj Tater Assistant Professor 2631/2017
(Business Administration)
(2) Members of Scrutiny Committee:
Sl.N Names of Members Post Held Bail Application o No.
1. Kalpana Purohit HOD (Eng.) 1679/2017
2. Smt. Vinita Parihar HOD (History) 1680/2017
3. Arjundev Charan HOD, Rajasthani 2061/2017 Department (Also Member of Section Committee) (14 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017]
4. Narendra Avasthi Dean (Arts Faculty) 2062/2017
5. Ramchander Singh Dean (Commerce 2188/2017 Rajpurohit Faculty)
6. Dr. Jugal Kishore HOD (Commerce 3558/2017 Sharma Faculty) (3) Members of Selection Committee:
Serial Names of Bail Application
No. Members No.
1. M.B. Shukla Professor, Faculty of 2632/2017
Commerce &
Management Studies,
Mahatma Gandhi Kashi
Vidhyapeeth, Varanasi
2. Nawal Kishore Professor, School of 2633/2017
Management, Indira
Gandhi National Open
University, New Delhi.
Espousing cause of the petitioners, learned counsel
appearing in the matter have canvassed following arguments for grant of pre-arrest bail:
Pursuant to order of this Court, barring petitioner Dr. Jugal Kishore, all others have joined investigation and investigating agency has thoroughly interrogated them. There is no imputation against petitioners that they have concealed any vital fact or material information.
(15 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] Neither there is any allegation of quid pro quo nor surfaced during investigation so far carried out. The then Vice Chancellor of the University and some other persons accused in the FIR are released on bail while considering their regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Selected candidates have faced the selection and they have been adjudged suitable by a duly constituted selection committee.
Ordinance 317 of the University, which was pressed into service during selection process, is still available on the book of statute and not declared ultra vires. The legal position, on a crucial question, whether in selection process of teachers, the UGC Regulations shall prevail or the Ordinances/Rules/Statutes etc of the University, is still fluid, as there are conflicting verdicts of the Supreme Court. Selection for Assistant Professor in Business Management is governed by a different Ordinance wherein qualification of Ph.D. is not prescribed and in their case so far University has not taken any adverse decision to discontinue their services. Petitioners-Members of the Scrutiny Committee, while making scrutiny of the application forms of various candidates, have acted as per note-sheet/order of the Vice Chancellor dated 3rd of December 2012 and in adherence of past prevalent practice in this behalf. Some of the petitioners are sought to be implicated in the (16 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] matter on the basis of 164 Cr.P.C. statements of S.K. Gupta, who was initially named accused in the FIR as the statements of accomplice Mr. S.K. Gupta are recorded after a lapse of good deal of time, there are serious doubts about inculpatory nature of these statements. Role of the Members of Selection Committee is posterior to the Screening Committee as such there was no occasion for them to examine or evaluate eligibility of an individual during selection process.
Petitioners have cooperated with the investigating agency during investigation and further undertake to do so, therefore, looking to the alleged criminal delinquency, custodial interrogation in the wake of changed circumstances not warranted.
There are bleak or rather remotest chances of petitioners fleeing away from justice or misusing their liberty while on bail.
Some of the judicial verdicts dilating on selection process are significant inasmuch as no infirmity is noticed by the Courts in this behalf.
The background of the petitioners nowhere reveal their previous criminal antecedents is yet another relevant consideration for favourable disposition of pre-arrest bail applications in the backdrop of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
Alleged offences under IPC are triable by Magistrate and no (17 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] offences under the Prevention of Corruption are founded on documentary evidence, which the investigating agency has already collected with advent of time.
Matter is blown out of proportion by certain vested interests to make mountain out of mole inasmuch as certain trifle procedural infirmities vis-a-vis few selections are projected with embellished version.
No need for custodial interrogation in absence of any criminal act (mensrea) of the petitioners and allegations of illegal gratification or relaxation of rules for an individual. Allegations against petitioner Sunil Asopa, selected as Associate Professor in Law, are superfluous. His qualification and teaching experience is in strict adherence of the advertisement and the solitary allegation is that he has pursued his Ph.D. while teaching.
Doubts about Ambadan Rohadiya being an expert of Rajasthani language ill-founded and these allegations are based on half-baked facts bereft of objective considerations. Jettison or aberration of sacrosanct fundamental right of personal liberty cannot be justified sans its abject necessity by someone having lawful authority.
In support of various contentions, learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance on following legal precedents:
(1) Kalyani Mathivanand Vs. K.V. Jeyaraj & Ors.
[(2015) 6 SCC 363].
(2) Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State Of Punjab [(1980) 2 SCC 564] (18 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] (3) Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2011) 1 SCC 694]. (4) Gudikanti Narasimhulu & Ors. Vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1978 SC 429) (5) Order dated 15.11.2016 passed by Division Bench in Dr. Chitra Sarupariya Vs. State & Ors. (6) Miss Meena Kumari Gurjar, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13449/2012, decided on 15th May 2015. (7) Jogindra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. [(1994) 4 SCC 260].
E. converso, learned Addl. Advocate General, while opposing all these bail applications, has articulated following submissions:
Criminal delinquencies of the petitioners not to be viewed munificently in these matters.
Custodial interrogation of the petitioners to elicit discovery of material facts for unfurling recruitment scam of the University desirable.
Power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised exceptionally and ordinarily Court is not expected to interfere with the investigation of a crime.
Investigation in the matter still in vogue and therefore at this stage interference by the Court not desirable sans miscarriage of justice.
Entire selection is sullied by patent corruption, favoritism and nepotism practiced in the process.
Petitioners have partially cooperated during investigation, therefore, custodial interrogation desirable to unearth truth. UGC is supreme body for higher education but its (19 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] Regulations in vogue, governing the province of recruitment, given complete go-bye in the selection. Recruitment in Management Studies made dehors the advertisement by giving undue advantage to some aspirants. I have considered the arguments advanced at Bar and scanned the materials available on record.
The provision for grant of pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has laudable objects, and therefore engrafted by the legislation to shun out-smart and influential persons from implicating their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or jeopardizing their liberty. With the accentuation of personal/political rivalry, this tendency has grown with impunity. In some of the Supreme Court judgments, referred to supra, on which reliance is placed by learned counsel for the petitioners, complete law on the subject is thrashed out. Without elaborately discussing the legal propositions adumbrated in all these judgments, the conclusions drawn may be summarized as infra:
(i) Legislature in enshrining salutary provision in Section 438 Cr.P.C. wanted to see that liberty of an individual is not put in jeopardy on frivolous grounds at the instance of unscrupulous or irresponsible persons or officers.
(ii) Being extraordinary powers should be exercised sparingly.
(iii) Necessity of custodial interrogation of the accused to be objectively examined in the light of alleged culpability.
(iv) Ascertaining the fact as to whether accused can misuse his liberty on grant of bail or there is likelihood of his fleeing from justice.
(v) Whether grant of anticipatory bail may hamper the investigation.
(20 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] Now adverting to peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case and insinuations hurled against petitioners in the original FIR or surfaced during investigation, suffice it to observe that barring petitioner Dr. Jugal Kishore all the petitioners have joined investigation, therefore, investigation has not been hampered. While it is true that FIR and further investigation has unfurled some serious infirmities but the alleged irregularities/illegalities have not been noticed by the Courts in their verdicts. Moreover, during the course of investigation, petitioners have been interrogated but so far nothing is unearthed to show quid pro quo in the selection process. A significant fact that the then Vice Chancellor of the University and some of the accused persons named in the FIR have been enlarged on bail, cannot loose sight of the Court for objective consideration of the bail plea of petitioners. Prima facie, alleged criminal delinquency of the petitioners cannot be construed of high amplitude vis-a-vis the then Vice Chancellor. Although petitioner Jugal Kishore has not joined the investigation but then being a Member of Scrutiny Committee his alleged criminal delinquency is on par with other members of the Scrutiny Committee and therefore it would be unjust to single him out in the backdrop of facts and circumstances of the case. It may also be noticed here that there are bleak or rather remotest chances of misusing liberty by the petitioners or their fleeing from justice sans any visible criminal antecedents. True it is that extraordinary powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly and not in a routine manner, but then in the (21 of 21) [CRLMB-1676/2017] peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case, use of judicial discretion seems imperative to safeguard fundamental right to life and liberty of the petitioners enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, which is imbibed in the said provision. Therefore, in totality, while refraining to make any comment on merits of the case and relying on sequence of events in the light of arguments put-forth by rival parties, I feel persuaded for favourable disposition of all these bail applications.
In view of foregoing discussions, all these bail applications are allowed and the accused-petitioners are ordered to be released on bail upon their arrest/surrender, pursuant to FIR No.269/14 of ACB, Jaipur, outpost Jodhpur, subject to following conditions:
(1) Each one of the petitioners shall furnish personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(2) All the petitioners are further directed to cooperate during investigation and appear for interrogation before investigating officer as and when called upon to do so.
(5) Petitioners shall neither leave the Country, nor change their residential address without prior permission of the learned trial Court.
(6) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer.
(7) If any necessity is felt by learned trial Court for imposing any other condition, depending on attending facts and circumstances, it shall be at liberty to prescribe the same.
(P.K. LOHRA), J.
arora/