Anil Mehrotra vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The present Application has been filed by the applicant – Anil Mehrotra seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 409, 420, 468, 471 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Case Crime No.91 of 2020 (Criminal Case No.5457 of 2021), registered at Kotwali Dalanwala, District Dehradun.

In the scholarship scam matter, a Special Investigation Team was constituted in pursuance of the letter dated 17.04.2018 of the Home Department of the State of Uttarakhand. Sub-Inspector Keshwanand Purohit was a member of the said Special Investigation Team. The matter was enquired. After enquiry, an FIR was lodged against the owner and director of Shriram Institute of Professional Studies, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, Kalka Engineering College Meerut, Uttar Pradesh and Kalka Institute for Research and Advanced Studies, Meerut.

Heard Mrs. Neetu Singh, learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the State.

As per the allegations of the First Information Report, the scholarships were also paid to fifteen persons, who were not the students of the said institutes.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant was the Director of Kalka Engineering College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh and Kalka Institute for Research and Advanced Studies, Meerut. The scholarships were paid to all the concerned students by Social Welfare Department directly through online process. Applicant had not embezzled any scholarship amount. The applicant had deposited Rs.5,46,000/ - through RTGS and Rs.4,61,729/ - through cheque before the Social Welfare Department. He was granted interim relief in the Writ Petition (Criminal) No.811 of 2020. The applicant, aged about 64 years, is a permanent resident of New Delhi, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. He is not a previous convict. All the relevant documents were in the possession of the investigating officer, and, the charge-sheet and the relevant documents have already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. However, he submitted on instruction that the charge-sheet has been filed by the investigating officer, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circum stances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, named Anil Mehrotra, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/ - and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions: -

(i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.