BA1/219/2022 on 28 April, 2022

[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/219/2022 on 28 April, 2022

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                    28TH APRIL, 2022

         FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 219 of 2022

Between:

Ashok Kumar                                       ...Applicant

and

State of Uttarakhand.                           ...Respondent


Counsel for the Applicant    :    Mr. Gaurav Singh.

Counsel for the State/       :    Mr. Atul Kumar Sah,
Respondent                        learned Deputy Advocate
                                  General assisted by Mrs.
                                  Mamta Joshi, 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.33 of 2021, registered with Police Station Chaukhutiya, District Almora for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. and Sections 66, 66C & 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

2. According to the First Information Report dated 02.11.2021, Rs.30,078/- of the informant was withdrawn by unknown person from her Bank Account No.37031097015 of SBI Rampur, Chaukhutiya. Initially, the First Information Report was registered under Section 420 I.P.C. During investigation, the name of the present applicant came into light.

3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Atul Kumar Sah, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mrs. Mamta Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person; he has been falsely implicated in this matter; no evidence has been found against him; he was not found in CCTV footage of any ATM; nothing has been recovered from him; he is in custody from the month of November, 2021 and charge- sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that no clear evidence has been found against the applicant to the effect that he (applicant) had withdrawn the said amount of the informant.

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.

9. Let the applicant-Ashok Kumar 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:28.04.2022 JKJ/Pant

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Uttarakhand High Court